Sonia Chatta v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala
High Court
27 Sep 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Sonia Chatta v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala
Date of order
27 Sep 2016
Assessment year(s)
2008-09
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Sonia Chatta v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
sr. No. 205 (2)ITA3592015 (O&M)Pronounced on: 27thseptember, 2016
Sonia Chatta
VERSUS
..... Appellant
Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ..... Respondent
CORAMHON1BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICEHON1BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
PresentMr.Divya Suri, Advocate, for the appellant,
Mr.Zora Singh Klar, Advocate, for the respondent.
<<<<<<<
DEEPAK SIBAL J.
The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 has been preferred by the assessee to challenge therein order dated15.07.2015, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Division Bench,Chandigarh,
The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2008-09.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that the result in thisappeal will follow the result in ITA-382-2015 “Naresh Kumar Vs.Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala”, dismissed by us by our separateorder and judgment passed today,
This appeal is accordingly dismissed in the same terms.
| S.J. VAZIFDAR |
CHIEF JUSTICE
| DEEPAK SIBAL |
7][th]September, 2016
JUDGE
shamsher
Whether reasoned/speaking*Yes / No
Whether reportable
*
Yes / 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.