In The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana v. Parvinder Singh, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: As the questions of law framed in the present appeal have already been decided against the revenue, we dismiss the appeal in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Income Tax Appeal No.95 of 2013 Date of decision: 11.07.2013
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana
..... Appellant
Versus
Parvinder Singh, Prop M/s Mohinder Singh Jewellers
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DR.BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON
Present:Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant.
*****
RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that the questions of law framed in the appeal have been decided against the revenue in Income Tax Appeal reported as 334 ITR 355 CIT v. Ashok Kumar.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.
As the questions of law framed in the present appeal have already been decided against the revenue, we dismiss the appeal in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
(RAJIVE BHALLA)
JUDGE
(DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON) 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.
EaseValue