Case LawHigh Court › M/S H.p. Board Of School Education v. Co...

M/S H.p. Board Of School Education v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shimla

High Court 29 Aug 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
M/S H.p. Board Of School Education v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shimla
Date of order
29 Aug 2017
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In M/S H.p. Board Of School Education v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shimla, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the Appellant: Mr.

Decision: Appeal stands disposed of as withdraw, so also pending application(s), if any.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA ITA No. 39 of 2015 Date of Decision: August 29, 2017 M/s H.P. Board of School Education …Appellant. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla ...Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the Appellant: Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Advocate, for the appellant. For the Respondents: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate, for the respondent. Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant, under instructions, states that appellant be allowed to withdraw the present appeal, reserving liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law, including filing an application for review/rectification, if permissible. Permission granted. Liberty reserved. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Appellant undertakes to file such application within a period of four weeks from today. Appellant further undertakes to fully cooperate and not to take unnecessary adjournments. The authority shall decide the application expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months thereafter. Needless to add, since appellant had been pursuing remedies before this Court, limitation shall not come in the way of adjudication of such petition. Liberty is reserved to approach the Court, if so required subsequently. Appeal stands disposed of as withdraw, so also pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice. August 29, 2017 (Purohit) (Ajay Mohan Goel), Judge.
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