The Pr. Commissioner Ofincome Tax-I, Chandigarh v. Sh.surinder Kumar Singal
High Court
30 Jan 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Pr. Commissioner Ofincome Tax-I, Chandigarh v. Sh.surinder Kumar Singal
Date of order
30 Jan 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Pr. Commissioner Ofincome Tax-I, Chandigarh v. Sh.surinder Kumar Singal, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Dhanalekshmi Bank Lt., [2015]373 ITR 526 (SC)', where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appealwithout going into the merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leavingthe question of law open, the present appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA,|AT CHANDIGARH
ITA-406-2016 (O&M)Decided on: 30.01.2017
The Pr. Commissioner ofIncome Tax-I, Chandigarh
_. Petitioner
Versus
Sh.Surinder Kumar Singal
.. Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICK AJAY KUMAR MITTALHON'BLE MR.JUSTICK RAMENDRA JAIN
Present :Ms.Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate
for the appellant.
Ajay Kumar Muttal,J. (Oral)
A perusal of the record shows that the tax effect involved inthe present case isa32,630/-. In view of the order of the Apex Court in2Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhanalekshmi Bank Lt., [2015]373 ITR 526 (SC)', where the Supreme Court had dismissed the appealwithout going into the merits of the appeal due to low tax effect leavingthe question of law open, the present appeal is dismissed. It is,however, clarified that dismissal of the appeal shall not be taken to beaffirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Further, the legal issueas claimed by the revenue is being left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case.
{Ajay Kumar Mittal]
Judge
30.01.2017sd
|Ramendra Jain;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