Case LawHigh Court › M/S Shiva Enterprises v. Commissioner Of...

M/S Shiva Enterprises v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh

High Court 23 Jul 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · cghccisdb
Parties
M/S Shiva Enterprises v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh
Date of order
23 Jul 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In M/S Shiva Enterprises v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: This appeal is accordingly dismissed.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WA No. 509 of 2018 M/s Shiva Enterprises 15/480, Circuit House Chowk, Civil Lines, RaipurChhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur Chhattisgarh., District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 100 Middletown Row,2nd Floor, Kolkata West Bengal, District : Kolkata, West Bengal 2nd Floor, Kolkata West Bengal, District : Kolkata, West Bengal ---- Respondents For AppellantFor Respondents :Shri Amrito Das, Advocate:Ms. Naushina Ali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan ShrivastavaHon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 23/07/2018 After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the learned singlejudge has set aside the order of Settlement Commission only on the ground that it hasnot decided anything and because of the direction issued by the High Court, hassimply closed the matter without application of mind. Though learned counsel for the appellant strenuously urged this Court toexamine the subsequent situation on account of amendments in the law, we are notinclined to go into this aspect as an authority of original jurisdiction when theSettlement Commission has completely abdicated its function to examine the matteron the basis of the law existing on the date of consideration. It would be open for the appellant herein to raise all contentions before theSettlement Commission including all such arguments as may be available to him onthe basis of subsequent amendments. We should make it clear that we have not commented upon the merits of petitioner's case with regard to his entitlement to settlement according to hisapplication filed before the Settlement Commission in accordance with the provisionsof law. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) 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