Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ro v. M/S.bh...

Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ro v. M/S.bhiwani Vanaspati Ltd

High Court 25 Jul 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ro v. M/S.bhiwani Vanaspati Ltd
Date of order
25 Jul 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ro v. M/S.bhiwani Vanaspati Ltd, the High Court (2024) 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 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:094141-DB ITC-36-1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.07.2024 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RO . . . . Petitioner Vs. M/S.BHIWANI VANASPATI LTD. . . . . Respondent **** CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Present None. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1.This is a file placed by the registry informing that the record of the file was fully burnt in fire, whereafter notices were sent to the concerned parties to reconstitute the file, but no response has been received from either side. fully burnt in fire, whereafter notices were sent to the concerned parties to reconstitute the file, but no response has been received from either side. 2.In view of above, we find that the present ITC cannot be decided by the Court on merits on the lack of documents. on merits on the lack of documents. 3.Accordingly, ITC is dismissed for non-prosecution. 4.All pending applications also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE July 25, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No2. Whether reportable? Yes/No
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan