Rohit Singhania v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh
High Court
23 Jul 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · cghccisdb
Parties
Rohit Singhania v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh
Date of order
23 Jul 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Rohit Singhania v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: This appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No. 519 of 2018
Rohit Singhania R/o 15/480, Circuit House Chowk, Civil Lines, RaipurChhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellant
Versus
1. Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh
2. Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur Chhattisgarh, District :Raipur, Chhattisgarh Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 100 Middletown Row,2nd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal, District : Kolkata, West Bengal 2nd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal, District : Kolkata, West Bengal
---- Respondents
For AppellantFor Respondents
:Shri Amrito Das, Advocate:Ms. Naushina Ali, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan ShrivastavaHon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey
Order On Board
23/07/2018
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the learned singlejudge has set aside the order of Settlement Commission only on the ground that it hasnot decided anything and because of the direction issued by the High Court, hassimply closed the matter without application of mind.
Though learned counsel for the appellant strenuously urged this Court toexamine the subsequent situation on account of amendments in the law, we are notinclined to go into this aspect as an authority of original jurisdiction when theSettlement Commission has completely abdicated its function to examine the matteron the basis of the law existing on the date of consideration.
It would be open for the appellant herein to raise all contentions before theSettlement Commission including all such arguments as may be available to him onthe basis of subsequent amendments.
We should make it clear that we have not commented upon the merits of
petitioner's case with regard to his entitlement to settlement according to hisapplication filed before the Settlement Commission in accordance with the provisionsof law.
This appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge
Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey)
Judge
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.