Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panchkula v. Dhanender Kumar (Huf
High Court
21 Apr 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panchkula v. Dhanender Kumar (Huf
Date of order
21 Apr 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panchkula v. Dhanender Kumar (Huf, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)JUDGE| 21.04.2022Dinesh (PANKAJ JAIN)JUDGE Whether speaking/reasonedYes.Whether ReportableNo
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH
ITA-168-2019(O&M)Date of decision: 21.04.2022
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula
.... Appellant
Versus
Dhanender Kumar (HUF)
...- Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICEK PANKAJ JAIN
Present:Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counselfor the appellant,
FE FE FS
TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that sincethe tax effect involved is less than the monetary limit as prescribed inCircular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board ofDirect Taxes, further amended vide Circular No.17 of 2019 datedOS.08.2019 read with Letter No.K.No.279/Misc/M-93/2018-ITJ dated20.08.2019, he has instructions to withdraw the present appeal.However, he prayed that liberty be granted to the appellant-revenue tofile an application for revival of the appeal, in case something survivestherein.
2 Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It 1s,however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant-revenueshall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits.Further, the legal issue as claimed by the appellant-revenue is being leftopen to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.
ITA-168-2019(O&M)
3)Since the main case has been dismissed, the pending C.M,
Application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)JUDGE|
21.04.2022Dinesh
(PANKAJ JAIN)JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasonedYes.Whether ReportableNo
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.