Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chandi...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh v. M/S Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Udyogltd., Sector 17, Chandigarh

High Court 19 Oct 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh v. M/S Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Udyogltd., Sector 17, Chandigarh
Date of order
19 Oct 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh v. M/S Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Udyogltd., Sector 17, Chandigarh, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH ITA No.280 of 2011Date of decision :19.10.2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh ...Appellant Versus M/s Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. UdyogLtd., Sector 17, Chandigarh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. **** HEMANT GUPTA J. (Oral) The Revenue has claimed the following substantialquestion of law: “Whether the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holdingthat the sale of investment in various equities/shareswas to be treated as long term capital gain when themain business of the assessee was to provide financialsupport to various industries/business concernsthrough investments in equity to earn profit from thesame.” Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has, in the orderunder appeal (Annexure A3), relied upon the judgment of thisCourt in petitioner's own case relating to assessment year1991-92 and 1992-93, i.e., in ITR No.20 of 2000 decided on30.09.2010. The petitioner has also relied upon the judgment ofspecial Bench of the Tribunal relating to assessment year ITA No.280 of 2011 1994- 95, 1995-96 and 1997-98 dated 24.04.2006. The IncomeTax Appeal against the said orders along with three otherconnected matters have been decided on 18.07.2011. Thequestion of law raised in the present appeal was the question oflaw raised in the aforesaid appeals and have been decidedagainst the Revenue. In view of the said fact, no substantial question of lawarises for our consideration. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA)JUDGE (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) 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