Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v....

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Raghunath Singh Thakur

High Court 19 Apr 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Raghunath Singh Thakur
Date of order
19 Apr 2017
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Raghunath Singh Thakur, the High Court (2017) decided the matter.

Decision: In view of the above stated position, we deem it proper to allow the review petitions and recall the judgment dated 13[th] April, 2016, passed by this Court in ITAs No.30, 35 and 36 of 2012.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) Nos.2040 of 2016, 382, 383 of 2017, Review Petition Nos.20, 18 & 19 of 2017 Date of decision: 19.04.2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax ..Petitioner Versus Raghunath Singh Thakur . Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr.Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr.Vishal Mohan, Advocate. ________________________________________________________________________________ Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral) CMP(M) Nos. 2040 of 2016, 382 and 383 of 2017 The applicant-petitioner has laid these limitation petitions for condonation of delay, which has crept–in in filing the review petitions. 2. We have gone through the limitation petitions and are of the considered view that the applicant-petitioner has carved out sufficient cause for condoning the delay. Hence, the delay in filing the review petitions is condoned. Accordingly, the applications are disposed of. Review Petition Nos.20, 18 and 19 of 2017 3. Review petitions are taken on Board. 4. Issue notice. Mr.Vishal Mohan, Advocate, waives notice on behalf of the respondent. 5. The instant review petitions have been moved for review of common judgment dated 13[th] April, 2016, passed by this Court in ITAs No.30, 35 and 36 of 2012. 6. Learned counsel for the parties stated that the judgment under review has been inadvertently passed on their statement, since these Income Tax Appeals do not fall under the ambit of circular No.21/2015 issued vide F.No.279/Mis.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, dated 10.12.2015. 7. In view of the above stated position, we deem it proper to allow the review petitions and recall the judgment dated 13[th] April, 2016, passed by this Court in ITAs No.30, 35 and 36 of 2012. Ordered accordingly. 8. The review petitions are disposed of accordingly.Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. List ITA Nos.30, 35 and 36 of 2012 on 5[th] July, 2017. ( Mansoor Ahmad Mir ) Chief Justice Chief Justice April 19, 2017 (tilak/vt) ( Sandeep Sharma ) 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