The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Jalandhar v. Tejinder Singh
High Court
27 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Jalandhar v. Tejinder Singh
Date of order
27 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Jalandhar v. Tejinder Singh, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR526 (SC)', where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going intothe merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leaving the question of law open, thepresent appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 331 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided on : 27.01.2016
The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jalandhar
Versus
Tejinder Singh
. . . Appellant
. . . Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG
PRESENT:Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocatefor the appellant-revenue.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Advocatefor the respondent-assessee.
****
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)
A perusal of the record shows that the tax effect involved in thepresent case is ` 58,000/-. In view of the order of the Apex Court in'Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Ltd., [2015] 373 ITR526 (SC)', where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal without going intothe merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leaving the question of law open, thepresent appeal is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that dismissal of the appealshall not be taken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, thelegal issue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
January 27, 2016
J.Ram
(RAJ RAHUL GARG) 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