Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ll, Chandigarh v. The Punjab State Coop. Supplies & Marketing Federation Ltd., Chandigarh
High Court
24 Feb 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ll, Chandigarh v. The Punjab State Coop. Supplies & Marketing Federation Ltd., Chandigarh
Date of order
24 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ll, Chandigarh v. The Punjab State Coop. Supplies & Marketing Federation Ltd., Chandigarh, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether speaking/ reasoneda2.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
310
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA|AT CHANDIGARHkkKITA No.279 of 2010Date of Decision: 24.02.2020
Commissioner of Income Tax-ll, Chandigarh
Versus
Appellant
The Punjab State Coop. Supplies & Marketing Federation Ltd., Chandigarh
Respondent
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Present:Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counselfor the appellant.for the appellant.
Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate withMr. M.S. Kanda, Advocatefor the respondent.
,,,,
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
1]Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that sincethe tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed inCircular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.1/7 of 2019 dated08.08.2019 read witn Letter No.-.No.2/9/Misc/M-93/2018-Il7J dated20.08.2019, he nas instructions to witnaraw the present appeal. However,ne prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to Tile anapplication for revival of the appeal, in case something survives therein.
|Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
3Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M.Application, if any, also stands disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
February 24, 2020
pankaj baweja
I. Whether speaking/ reasoneda2. Whether reportabl
Yes /NoYes /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.