Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak v...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak v. Jaljit Singh, Contractor

High Court 29 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak v. Jaljit Singh, Contractor
Date of order
29 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak v. Jaljit Singh, Contractor, the High Court (2016) 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 AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHwhe ae al ITA No. 29 of 2012 (O&M)Date of decision: 29.01.2016 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak ..Appellant Vs. Jaljit Singh, Contractor| ...Kespondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICK AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICEK RAJ RAHUL GAR Present :Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for Mr. Inderpreet Singh, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondent. KKKKK AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue states that since thetax effect involved is<a15,76,273/-she has instructions to withdraw thepresent appeal in view of the circular No. 21/2015, dated 10.12.2015 issuedby the C.B.D.T., New Delhi. However, she prayed that liberty be granted tothe revenue to file an application for revival of the appeal in case somethingsurvives therein| ? Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It 1s,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 1s being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case.| (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)JUDGE 29.01.2016WdaSse (RAJ RAHUL GARG)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