The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, Ludhiana v. M/S Nahar Exports Ltd., Ludhiana
High Court
06 Aug 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, Ludhiana v. M/S Nahar Exports Ltd., Ludhiana
Date of order
06 Aug 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, Ludhiana v. M/S Nahar Exports Ltd., Ludhiana, the High Court (2018) 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA-376-2008 and
X-Obj.No.30-CII-2009 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 6.8.2018
The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ludhiana
Versus
...Appellant.
M/s Nahar Exports Ltd., Ludhiana
...Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN.HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN.
PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant.Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Amit Parshad, Advocate for the respondent.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
1.Copy of letter dated 30.7.2018/1.8.2018 is taken on record.2.Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since thetax effect involved is ` 22,78,215/-, he has instructions to withdraw thepresent appeal as well as the applications in view of Circular No.03/2018,dated 11[th] July, 2018, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, NewDelhi. However, he has prayed that liberty be granted to the revenue to filean application for revival of the appeal in case something survives therein.
3.Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is,however, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shall not betaken to be affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legalissue as claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case.
4.Learned counsel for the respondents prays for withdrawal of thecross-objections along with the applications.
5.Ordered accordingly.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE
August 6, 2018(AVNEESH JHINGAN)gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/ReasonedYes/NoWhether ReportableYes/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.
EaseValue