Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Jalandhar...

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Jalandhar v. Shri Rakesh Kumar, Nagesh Hosiery Exports,Civil Lines, Ludhiana

High Court 28 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Jalandhar v. Shri Rakesh Kumar, Nagesh Hosiery Exports,Civil Lines, Ludhiana
Date of order
28 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
1981-82
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Jalandhar v. Shri Rakesh Kumar, Nagesh Hosiery Exports,Civil Lines, Ludhiana, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: 160 of 1999 [2] question, as per Certificate dated 25.2.1999 issued by the Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Ludhiana under Section 90(2) read with Section 91 of theFinance Act No.2 of 1998.3.In view of above, this reference is dismissed as having beenrendered infructuous, as prayed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.R. No. 160 of 1999Date of decision: 28.8.2009 The Commissioner of Income-tax,Jalandhar. Vs. ......Appellant Shri Rakesh Kumar, Nagesh Hosiery Exports,Civil Lines, Ludhiana. ... Respondent CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY PRESENT:Mr.K.K.Mehta, Senior Standing Counsel for revenue.**** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) 1.The following question of law has been referred for opinion ofthis Court arising out of order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, dated 22.11.1990 in ITA No. 522 of 1991for assessment year 1981-82: “ Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ITAT is right in law in upholding theorder of the ld CIT(A) who deleted the penalty of Rs.1,12,294/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of he Income-tax Act, 1961?” 2.Learned counsel for the revenue states that the issue has beensettled under 'Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme' for the assessment year in I.T.R. No. 160 of 1999 [2] question, as per Certificate dated 25.2.1999 issued by the Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Ludhiana under Section 90(2) read with Section 91 of theFinance Act No.2 of 1998.3.In view of above, this reference is dismissed as having beenrendered infructuous, as prayed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 28, 2009 raghav (DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE I.T.R. No. 160 of 1999 [3] I.T.R. No. 160 of 1999 [4]
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