Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Puda Bhawan, Sector 62, Mohali v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle76(1) Mohali
High Court
27 Apr 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Puda Bhawan, Sector 62, Mohali v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle76(1) Mohali
Date of order
27 Apr 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Puda Bhawan, Sector 62, Mohali v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle76(1) Mohali, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: For the reasons stated therein, this petition is also dismissed in the same terms.
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
CWP No. 26099 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.04.2018
Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, PUDA Bhawan, Sector 62, Mohali
.......Petitioner
versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle76(1) Mohali
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J.VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN, JUDGE
Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with
Mr. M.S. Kanda, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel
for the respondent. *****
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
It is agreed that the result of this petition would follow the result in Civil Writ Petition No. 26125 of 2017 Greater Mohali Area Development|Authority, PUDA Bhawan, Sector 62, Mohali v. Deputy Commissioner of Income|Tax, Circle-6(1), Mohali, which we dismissed today by a separate order and judgment. For the reasons stated therein, this petition is also dismissed in the same terms.
(S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE
27[th] April, 2018 ravinder
(AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable:
√ Yes/No Yes/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.
EaseValue