For Orders, See Ita v. Commissioner Ofincome Tax, Chandigarh
High Court
04 Apr 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
For Orders, See Ita v. Commissioner Ofincome Tax, Chandigarh
Date of order
04 Apr 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In For Orders, See Ita v. Commissioner Ofincome Tax, Chandigarh, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2.
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 AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH
ITA No.328 of 2015 (O&M)Date of decision:04.04.2016
The Principal Commissioner of Income [Tax I, Chandigar
.....- Appel
Pawan Kumar lah, Sector 22, Chandigarh
....mesponden
CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICK AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON BLE MRS. JUSTICEK RAJ RAHUL GARG
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant-revenue,Mr. Ved Jain, Advocate for the respondent-assessee.
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.
For orders, see ITA No.314 of 2015 (Pawan Kumar Tah vs.
Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Chandigarh).
(Ajay Kumar Mittal)Judge
April 04, 201612&8
(Raj Rahul Garg)sudge
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.
EaseValue