Case Law › High Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pa...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panchkula v. M/S Panchkula Golf Club, Sector 3, Panchkula

High Court 01 Mar 2016 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · phhc

Parties

Date of order

01 Mar 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panchkula v. M/S Panchkula Golf Club, Sector 3, Panchkula, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 No. 436 of 2015 (O&M)Decided on : 01.03.2016 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Versus M/s Panchkula Golf Club, Sector 3, Panchkula ... Appellant ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITIALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG PRESENT: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocatefor the appellant-revenue.++++ AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (O@RAL Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue States that the tax effectinvolved in the present case 1s 410,95,749/-. He submitted that keeping inview the circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 issued by the C.B.D.T., NewDelhi, the present appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. However, liberty begranted to the revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in casesomething survives therein. 2.Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is, however,clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not be taken to beaffirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issue asclaimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriateCase. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE (RAJ RAHUL GARG)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.