Case LawHigh Court › Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)-2 C...

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)-2 Chandigarh v. Chief Manager, Pnb

High Court 03 Jun 2015 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)-2 Chandigarh v. Chief Manager, Pnb
Date of order
03 Jun 2015
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)-2 Chandigarh v. Chief Manager, Pnb, the High Court (2015) decided the matter.

Issue: Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr.

Decision: Consequently, the present appeal stands disposed of.

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 AT SHIMLA ITA No. 16 of 2015 Date of Decision: 3.6.2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 Chandigarh Versus …Petitioner Chief Manager, PNB …Respondent ________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate. For the respondent : Per Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral): None. Since the substantial question of law raised in this petition has already been answered in ITA No.17 of 2014, titled as Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Chandigarh versus State Bank of Patiala Sectt. Shimla, decided on 31.12.2014, the orders passed by the appellate authority are upheld. Consequently, the present appeal stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge June 3, 2015 (awasthi) (Sureshwar Thakur), 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