The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Patiala v. M/S State Bank Of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala
High Court
24 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Patiala v. M/S State Bank Of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala
Date of order
24 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Patiala v. M/S State Bank Of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: (Oral) On the last date, the matter was adjourned to enable learnedcounsel for the revenue to inform whether the Committee of Secretarieshad declined the permission to file appeal, as claimed by learned counsel forthe assessee.
Decision: The appeals are dismissed as not pressed, subject to the libertyin above terms.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA Nos. 841 of 2008, 50, 62 to 66 & 146 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.8.2009
The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Patiala
......Appellant
Vs.
M/s State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala.
...Respondent
CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
PRESENT:Mr.Rajesh Katoch Advocate, for the revenue.Mr.Pankaj Jain, Advocate and
Mr.Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the assessee.
****
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral)
On the last date, the matter was adjourned to enable learnedcounsel for the revenue to inform whether the Committee of Secretarieshad declined the permission to file appeal, as claimed by learned counsel forthe assessee.
He confirms that permission to file appeal has been declined inmeeting held on 4.6.2009 in the Cabinet Secretariat, Litigation Cell.Accordingly, the appeals are not pressed.
Learned counsel, however, reserves liberty to revive ITA Nos.64 and 66 of 2009, if there is a change of circumstance, which he isexpecting to take place.
The appeals are dismissed as not pressed, subject to the libertyin above terms.
Copy of the order be placed on the file of each connected case.
(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE
(DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE
Note: Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter? ........Yes/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.