Case LawHigh Court › Cwp/3501/1999 Of Swarankar Sang, Nawansh...

Cwp/3501/1999 Of Swarankar Sang, Nawanshahr v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar & Anr

High Court 05 Feb 2020 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Cwp/3501/1999 Of Swarankar Sang, Nawanshahr v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar & Anr
Date of order
05 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Cwp/3501/1999 Of Swarankar Sang, Nawanshahr v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar & Anr, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Issue: (Oral) inThis petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of theConstitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the natureof certiorari quashing the impugned Annexure P-14 order refusingregistration to the petitioner under Section 12A(a) and writ in the natureof mandamus dire...

Decision: 3,In our opinion, since the case is pending tor more than 20years, no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending.Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed as not pressed with CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) liberty to the petitioner to revive the same if anything survives.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CW P-3501-1999 (O&MDate of Decision : 5.2.2020 Swarankar Sang, Nawanshahr | ...... Petitioner 1 ,%2% Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and another ee Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI* HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN:::* HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN::: Present ;Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocatefor the petitioner.for the petitioner. Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing counselfor the respondents, ::: AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) inThis petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of theConstitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the natureof certiorari quashing the impugned Annexure P-14 order refusingregistration to the petitioner under Section 12A(a) and writ in the natureof mandamus directing respondent No.1 that registration be granted to thepetitioner, ?DAt the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant statesthat despite his best efforts, he is unable to verify whether the petitioner isalive or not. 3,In our opinion, since the case is pending tor more than 20years, no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending.Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed as not pressed with CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) liberty to the petitioner to revive the same if anything survives. 4Since the main case has been decided, the pendingapplication, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARIT)JUDGE 52.2020anuradha (AVNEESH JHINGAN)JUDGE *Whether speaking/reasoned*Whether reportable Yes/NoYes/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