Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Panchkula v. Dr. Mrs. Sonia Obero
High Court
25 Feb 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Panchkula v. Dr. Mrs. Sonia Obero
Date of order
25 Feb 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Panchkula v. Dr. Mrs. Sonia Obero, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest Present:Mr.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No.115 of 2011Date of Decision:-25.2.72016
Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula
Versus
.... Appellant
Dr. Mrs. Sonia Obero|
respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANTHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PB. BAJANTHRI
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest
Present:Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate with.Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent.
0000
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the appellant - revenue states thatsince tne tax Involved in the instant case IsL5,58,901/-, he does notwant to press the appeal in view of the circular dated 10.12.2015issued by the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, he prays that libertymay be granted to the revenue authorities to seek revival of theappeal, if need be.
In this view of the matter, the instant appeal is dismissedas not pressed for leaving the question of law open to be adjudicatedin some appropriate case.
(SURYA KANT)JUDGE
February 25, 2016.sandeep sethi
(P.B. BAJANTHRI)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.