Case Law › High Court › Ita/210/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Incom...

Ita/210/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax Panchkula v. Himalayan Expressway Ltd

High Court 23 Oct 2019 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · phhc

Parties

Date of order

23 Oct 2019

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/210/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax Panchkula v. Himalayan Expressway Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 111-3 ITA-210-2018 (O&M)Date of decision :23.10.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula ...... Appellant VeTSUS M/s Himalayan Expressway Ltd. ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARTHON'BLE MR.JUSTICEHARNARESH SINGH GILL Present ;Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing counselfor the appellant. ... AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) inLearned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since the taxeffect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes,further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 read withLetter No.F.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019, he hasinstructions to withdraw the present appeal. However, he prayed that libertybe granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal, in case something survives therein. |Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. ,(Since the main case has been dismissed as withdrawn, the pendingC.M, if any also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARITJUDGE 23.10.2019anuradha (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)JUDGE Whether speaking/reasonedWhether 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.

✅ 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.