M/S Punjab Urban Planning And Development Authority v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Chandigarh And Another
High Court
17 Aug 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
M/S Punjab Urban Planning And Development Authority v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Chandigarh And Another
Date of order
17 Aug 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In M/S Punjab Urban Planning And Development Authority v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Chandigarh And Another, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Decision: The petition is disposed of accordingly.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition.No.15004 of 2011Date of decision: 17.8.2011
M/s Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority
...Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax II, Chandigarh and another
Respondents
...
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALPresent: Mr. Ravi Shankar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, ACJ.
Notice of motion.
Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel, presentin Court, accepts notice.
This petition seeks quashing of order dated 5.8.2011,Annexure P.10 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax II,Chandigarh rejecting prayer for stay of demand arising out of order of
penalty passed by the Assessing authority against which appeal ispending before the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals).
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,we are of the view that recovery to the extent of 50% of the demand
raised on the basis of impugned order should remain stayed pendingdecision of appeal. The appeal may be decided expeditiously and asfar as possible within three months from the date of receipt of a copyof this order.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Adarsh Kumar Goel) Acting Chief Justice
August 17, 2011‘gs’
(Ajay Kumar Mittal) 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.