Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Punjab State Warehousing Corp

High Court 13 Sep 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Punjab State Warehousing Corp
Date of order
13 Sep 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. M/S Punjab State Warehousing Corp, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: 3.Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

ITA No. 435 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH The Commissioner of Income Tax-I Versus M/s Punjab State Warehousing Corp. ITA No. 435 of 2010Date of Decision: 13.9.2010 ....Appellant. ...Respondent. CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL.HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the appellant. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1.This appeal has been preferred by the revenue underSection 206A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (B), Chandigarhpassed in ITA No. 292/Chandi/2008 dated 23.9.2009, for theassessment year 2004-05, proposing following questions of law:- “i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law inallowing relief to the assessee on the basis ofthe material which was not produced beforethe A.O? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in -2- allowing relief to the assessee withoutappreciating the facts that the amount was duefrom Punjab Government on account of excess payment?” 2.Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that thematter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated30.7.2010 in ITA Nos. 275 and 277 of 2010. 3.Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE September 13, 2010gbs (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)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