Commissioner Of Income Tax-Il, Chandigarh v. M/S Ind Switt Laboratories Ltd
High Court
18 Mar 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Il, Chandigarh v. M/S Ind Switt Laboratories Ltd
Date of order
18 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax-Il, Chandigarh v. M/S Ind Switt Laboratories Ltd, 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAATCHANDIGARH
ITA No. 144 of 2011 (O&M)Decided on : 18.03.2016
Commissioner of Income Tax-Il, Chandigarh
.. Appellant
Versus
M/s Ind Switt Laboratories Ltd.
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG
PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocatefor the respondent.
))))
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that the taxeffect involved in the present case is =16,03,125/-, she has instructions towithdraw the present appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015, dated10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, she prayed thatliberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein,
2 Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE
March 18, 2016
smriti
(RAJ RAHUL GARG)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.
EaseValue