Ita/226/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Ldh v. M/S Mahavir Spinning Mills
High Court
29 Mar 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Ita/226/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Ldh v. M/S Mahavir Spinning Mills
Date of order
29 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
1989-90
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Ita/226/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Ldh v. M/S Mahavir Spinning Mills, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
ITA No. 226 of 2003 (O&M)-|-
IN THE HIGH COURT OR PUNJAB AND HARYANA|AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 226 of 2003 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 29.03.2016
Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana
....... Appellant
)"*%+%
M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd.
...... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICK RAJESH BINDAL,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU
Present:Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocatefor the appellant.
RAJESH BINDAL,J.
This appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act’), against the order dated25.9.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ChandigarhBench (B), in ITA No.610/Chandi/1996, tor the assessment year1989-90, raising the following substantial question of law;
(i) Whether interest u/s 244A is to be allowed inrespect of payments made u/s 140-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961?
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that
in view of circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circularNo.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by Central
Board of Direct Taxes, he does not wish to press the present appeal, asthe tax effect involved is less thanTL20 lacs. However, he prays that
ITA No. 226 of 2003 (O&M)
liberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein,
Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It ishowever, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shallnot be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Thelegal issue as claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated inan appropriate case,
29.03.2016T@eIN
(RAJESH BINDAL)JUDGE(HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)JUDGE
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.