Cwp v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),Faridabad And Another
High Court
28 Aug 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Cwp v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),Faridabad And Another
Date of order
28 Aug 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Cwp v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals),Faridabad And Another, the High Court (2014) allowed 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 HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 14316 of 2014 Decided on : 28.08.2014
Smt. Ved Kumari Subhash Chander
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),Faridabad and another
. . . Petitioner
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma , Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tejinder K. Joshi, Advocate for the respondents.****
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)
In this writ petition, the primary prayer of the petitioner is that coercive steps be not taken to recover the amount in question from the petitioner, till the disposal of the first appeal, which is stated to be pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad.
2.Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has not filed any application for stay of recovery before respondent No.1 and it would be appropriate to file such application before the authority concerned.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to file an application for stay of recovery of amount in question before respondent No.1.
4.Dismissed as withdrawn. It shall, however, be open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedies as may be available to her in accordance with law.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
August 28, 2014
J.Ram
(FATEH DEEP SINGH) 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.