Case Law › High Court › Ompm/11/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ompm/11/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds) v. State Bank Of Patiala

High Court 25 Jun 2014 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · cmis

Parties

Date of order

25 Jun 2014

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

Case summary

In Ompm/11/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds) v. State Bank Of Patiala, the High Court (2014) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

OMP(M) No. 11 of 2014. 25.06.2014.Present: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Mohan, Advocate, for the respondent. OMP(M) No. 11 of 2014. The appellant/applicant has filed this application seeking condonation of 27 days’ delay, which has crept-in in filing the appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent has no objection in case, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. His statement is taken on record. Heard. We have gone through the appeal as well as the application for condonation of delay. We are of the considered view that the appellant/applicant has carved out sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Thus, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is disposed of. The appeal is taken on Board. The Registry to diarize the same. Issue notice to the respondent. Mr. Vishal Mohan, Advocate, waives notice on behalf of the respondent. List on 12[th] August, 2014. (Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice. June 25, 2014 (cm Thakur) (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) 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.