Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Iii , Ludhiana v. M/S Karna International
High Court
25 Apr 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Iii , Ludhiana v. M/S Karna International
Date of order
25 Apr 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Iii , Ludhiana v. M/S Karna International, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of above, no substantial question of law arises.The appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
***
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH
Income Tax Appeal No.895 of 2010 Date of decision: 25.4.2011
Commissioner of Income-tax-III , Ludhiana
...Appellant
Versus
M/s Karna International...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. Denesh Goel, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant.
****
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J (Oral).
1.This Appeal has been preferred by the assessee underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated19.2.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ChandigarhBench 'B',Chandigarh in ITA No.1033/CHD/2009, for theassessment year 2004-05, raising following substantial questions oflaw:-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the ITAT is right in law in upholding theorder of the CIT(A)-II, Ludhiana dated 31.8.2009deleting the penalty imposed u/s 271 (1)(c) ofI.T.Act?”
2.Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that matteris covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated
***
28.7.2010 in ITA No.225 of 2010 The Commissioner of Income
Tax Vs. M/s Raj Overseas.
In view of above, no substantial question of law arises.The appeal is dismissed.
(Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge
April 25,2010Pka
(Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Judge
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.