Case LawHigh Court › Eee Apppellant v. M/S Kuantum Paper Ltd

Eee Apppellant v. M/S Kuantum Paper Ltd

High Court 03 Sep 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Eee Apppellant v. M/S Kuantum Paper Ltd
Date of order
03 Sep 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Eee Apppellant v. M/S Kuantum Paper Ltd, the High Court (2019) allowed the appeal.

Decision: Allowed as prayed for. | The present appeal stands disposed of in the same terms as in ITAF449FPOTS.

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 119 ITA-99-2019 (O&M)Date of Decision : 3.9.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh eee APpPellant Versus M/s Kuantum Paper Ltd. oe Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JIUSTICE AJAY TEWAR*HON'BLE MR. JUSTICK HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present :Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocatefor the appellant. 999 AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) CM;3007FCITm2019 For the reasons recorded, the application is allowed. Delay of157 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. Main Case Learned counsel states that the facts of the present case arecovered by the decision of this Court passed in ITAF449,POTStitled as FPr. Commissioner of Income TaxI, Chandigarh vs. M/s.KuantumPapers Ltdl, SCOFTI,19, First Floor Sector,r,C, Madhya _ Mar Chandigarhand prays that the present case may be dispose of in the sameterms. We find this to be correct. Allowed as prayed for. | The present appeal stands disposed of in the same terms as in ITAF449FPOTS. ITA-99-2019 (O&M) Since the main case has been decided, the pending CM, if any, also stands disposed of, (AJAY TEWARIT)JUDGE 3.9.2019anuradha (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned*Yes/NoWhether 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.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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