Shiv Kumar Ohri (Huf v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another
High Court
06 Feb 2020 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Shiv Kumar Ohri (Huf v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another
Date of order
06 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Shiv Kumar Ohri (Huf v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether speaking/ reasonedYes/Noa.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
ITA No.99 of 2001
{1}
414-]IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANAAT CHANDIGARHy+. Date of Decision: 06.02.2020
1ITA No.99 of 2001
Shiv Kumar Ohri (HUF),
Versus
Appellant
Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and another|
Respondents
2.ITA No.100 of 2001
Shiv Kumar Ohri (HUF)
Versus
Appellant
Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and another|
Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Present:Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocatefor the appellant.for the appellant.
Mr. Vivek Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue.With Mr. Varun Issar, Jr. Standing Counsel.
++++
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
,-.These two appeals have been filed under Section 260-Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar in ITA No.234(ASR)/1993and MA No.19(ASR)/2000 in ITA No./734(ASR)//1993 for theassessment year 1989-90 respectively.
,1.Tne issue involved in potn the appeals relates to aemandof|=88 3-3:4'
,8.Considering the trivial nature of impact, we do not deem it
ITA No.99 of 2001
appropriate to decide the appeals and the same are, therefore,dismissed, leaving the questions of law to be decided in some otherCdaS@
,9.Ordered accordingly.
,>.Since the appeals are dismissed, the pendingapplication, if any, stands disposed of.application, if any, stands disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
February 06, 2020
pankaj baweja
I. Whether speaking/ reasonedYes/Noa. Whether reportableYes/No
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.