The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar-Ii, Jalandhar v. M/S. Hindi Press (Gurgaon), Pucca Bagh, Hindsamachar Street, Jalandhar
High Court
12 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar-Ii, Jalandhar v. M/S. Hindi Press (Gurgaon), Pucca Bagh, Hindsamachar Street, Jalandhar
Date of order
12 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar-Ii, Jalandhar v. M/S. Hindi Press (Gurgaon), Pucca Bagh, Hindsamachar Street, Jalandhar, the High Court (2008) 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 No. 399 of 2008 (O&M)Date of decision : 12.8.2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar
vs
M/s. Hindi Press (Gurgaon), Pucca Bagh, Hindsamachar Street, Jalandhar
.....Appellant
..... Respondent
Coram:Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant GuptaHon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Sanjeev Bansal, Advocate, for the appellant.
Hemant Gupta J.
The revenue is in appeal against the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short, “theTribunal”), in I.T.A. No.386(ASR)/2006 dated 7.9.2007 for the assessmentyear 2001-02, raising the following substantial question of law:-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law to hold the return valideven though it was not signed by the person required u/s140 (cc) of the Income Tax Act.?”
The said question of law does not arise in view of the DivisionBench judgment rendered in CWP No.2715 of 2006 titled as HindSamachar Limited vs Union of India and others, decided on 11.3.2008.
In view of the above said order, the present appeal is dismissedwith no order as to costs.
(Hemant Gupta) Judge
12.8.2008vs.
(Rajesh Bindal)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.