Cwp/27324/2017 Of Piyara Lal v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Patiala And Anr
High Court
01 Dec 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Cwp/27324/2017 Of Piyara Lal v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Patiala And Anr
Date of order
01 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Cwp/27324/2017 Of Piyara Lal v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Patiala And Anr, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.27324 of 2017.Date of Decision: December 01, 2017
Piyara Lal
VeTSUS
Principle Commissioner of Income Tax and another,
—___ Petitioner
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICEK SURYA KANTHON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL.he
Present: Mr.Manyjit Singh Sarao, Advocate, for the petitioner. |
Surya Kant, J(Oral)
The petitioner has been served with a show-cause notice undersection 263(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for re-assessment of his incomein respect of the Assessment Year 2010-11. The show-cause notice dated17/20.11.2017 (P-10) is self-speaking and self-explanatory. It requires thepetitioner to show-cause as to why the order suggested therein be not passedfor which objections have already been invited from the petitioner on orbefore 01.12.2017)
In our considered view, no writ petition is maintainable againsta show-cause notice. The petitioner, if so advised, may submit objectionsagainst the show-cause notice and if any adverse order is passed, he shallhave his remedy against the same in accordance with law.
The writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However,with a view to enable the petitioner to submit objections, it is directed that ifthe petitioner submits his objections by 05.12.2017, the same shall beconsidered on merits and in accordance with law.
Dasti.
ISURYA KANT]JUDGE
December 01, 2017mohumnae
ISUDHIR MITTAL]JUDGE.
JUDGE.
Whether speaking/reasonedWhether Reportable
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.