Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Ludhiana v. Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal
High Court
27 Oct 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Ludhiana v. Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal
Date of order
27 Oct 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Ludhiana v. Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
str. No. 330 (14ITA2342011 (O&M)Decided on: 27.10.2016
Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Ludhiana..... AppellantVERSUS
Sh. Shiv Parshad Aggarwal
..... Respondent
CORAMHON4BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICEHON4BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
PresentMr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr.Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent.;;;;;;;
S.J.VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since thetax effect involved is Rs.10.39 lacs (approx.), he has instructions tolwithdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated10.12.2015, issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he prayed thatliberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein,
|Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is,however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not betaken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legalissue as Claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case.
| S.J. VAZIFDAR |
CHIEF JUSTICE
27 10. 2016
shamsher
| DEEPAK SIBAL |
JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speakingYes / No
Whether reportableYes / No
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue