Case Law › High Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala v. S...

Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala v. Shri Amrinder Singh, Patiala

High Court 11 Feb 2016 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · phhc

Parties

Date of order

11 Feb 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala v. Shri Amrinder Singh, Patiala, 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHwhe ae al ITR No. 86 of 1997 (O&M)Date of decision: 11.02.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ...Petitioner Vs. Shri Amrinder Singh, Patiala ...Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICK AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICEK RAJ RAHUL GAR Present :Mr. Z. S. Klar, Advocatefor the petitioner. © KK KK AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner-revenue states that since thetax effect involved is.=a$2,500/-he has instructions to withdraw the presentreference in view of the circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 issued bythe C.B.D.T., New Delhi. Accordingly, a prayer was made that the referencebe returned unanswered. However, it was submitted that liberty be grantedto the revenue to file an application for revival of the reference in casesomething survives therein. |Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. 3)Consequently, reference 1s returned unanswered. However, thisshall not mean any expression of opinion on the merits of the controversyinvolved herein. At the same time, the question of law has been left open tobe adjudicated in an appropriate case as and when occasion arises. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE 11.02.2016 WdaSse (RAJ RAHUL GARG)JUDGE

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA

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.