Case LawHigh Court › Kapoor Singh v. Assistant Commissioner O...

Kapoor Singh v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 19 Jan 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Kapoor Singh v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
19 Jan 2017
Assessment year(s)
2002-03
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Kapoor Singh v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: 3.Thus, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal and the same stands dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

ITA-131-2016 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-131-2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.01.2017 Kapoor Singh ..... Appellant Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ..... Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Dhawal Bhandari, Advocate for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1.The appellant-assessee has filed this appeal under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, impugning the order dated 15.09.2015(Annexure A-7) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DelhiBench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Tribunal') in ITA Nos.5044, 5045, 5046, 5047/DEL/2011, relating to assessment years 2000-01,2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. 2.A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunalvide order impugned herein had decided the appeals relating to fourassessment years i.e. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04 bearing ITANos. 5044, 5045, 5046, 5047/DEL/2011. Learned counsel for the appellantfairly submitted that against the decision of the Tribunal, Annexure A-7 inITA No. 5046/DEL/2011 for the assessment year 2002-03, the appellant hadfiled ITA-90-2016 before this Court, claiming identical substantialRishu Kataria2017.01.30 11:22I attest to the accuracy andquestions of law. The said appeal was dismissed by this Court vide orderauthenticity of this document ITA-131-2016 (O&M) dated 23.05.2016. It was also not disputed that review application i.e. RA-CR-196-CII-2016 against the said order dated 23.05.2016, was alsodismissed by this Court vide order dated 05.08.2016. 3.Thus, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal and the same stands dismissed. ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE January 19, 2017 ( RAMENDRA JAIN )rishu JUDGEWhether speaking/reasonedYes/NoWhether ReportableYes/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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan