Case Law › High Court › Ita/45/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of I...

Ita/45/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana v. Sh. Amarjeet Dhall

High Court 21 Nov 2019 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · phhc

Parties

Date of order

21 Nov 2019

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/45/2019 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana v. Sh. Amarjeet Dhall, 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.

ITA No. 45 of 2019(0&M) Date of decision : 21.11.2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhianawees APPellant4")&0& Sh. Amarjeet Dhall woe RESPOndent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICEK AJAY TEWAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICEALKA SARIN Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. |AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1.Mr. Katoch states that originally the tax effect in this case wasmuch higher but now the Assessing Officer has clarified that tax effectis lessthan the monetary limit as prescribed in Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17of 2019 dated O8.O08.2019 read with Letter No.E.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITdated 20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal. However,he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue to file an application forrevival of the appeal, in case something survives therein, 2 Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.3 |Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M.Application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARITJUDGE November 21, 2019tripti (ALKA SARIN)JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether 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.