Wp/858/2005 Of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
27 Apr 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cghccisdb
Parties
Wp/858/2005 Of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
27 Apr 2007
Assessment year(s)
2001-02
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/858/2005 Of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
^. ',
Hlah COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BltASPURSingleBench:Hon'bte ShriH.L. Dattu, CJ.WritPetSfion No.858of2006pErmoNERChhattisgarh SteAe Electricity Board, P.0.^underNagar,Danganiya,Ratpur(Chhattisgarh), Through fts Secretary.Vs.RESPONDENTS1.The Chief Commissiwer of Income Tax,-Raipur.2.The Assistarrt Comnnissioner of tnronwTax. Circie 1 (2) Raipur3.Union ofIndia,Throughits Secretery,MinistryofFinanc^,DepartmentofRevenue, North Btock,NewDelhi-110001.4.UnionofIndia,Throughits Seoretery,Ministry of Power, Shram Shakti Bhawan,New Delhi.
Writ Petition under Article 226 read with Article 227 ofthe Qonstitution of India.
Present:Shri Ravi Stonkar Prasad, Senior Advocate with Smt. Suparr®Srivastava and Shri P.S. Koshy, coun^! for the petitioner.
Shri B.K. Rawat counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2,
ORALORDERL(Passed on 27" i^ll,5007)
The petitioner - Chhattisgarh State Electrteity Board ( f©rslrort 'theBoard") is before this Courtinter a//acalling in question ttie valicfity orothenwise ofthe impugned ordersdated (^.11.2004 and 11.11.2004, passectbythe respondent - Income Tax Authorities under Section 142 (2A) of Wie ln<x>meTax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) for the assessment year 2001-02, 2002-03anct 2003-04.
(2)During the pendency of this writ petition, ttie responctenl^ AssesslngAuthority has completed the regutar assessment under Swtion 143(3) of tlieAct.(3)Sincetheassessmentshaveatreadybeenc©mp!eted faytherespondents under Section 143 (3) of the Act, questlon of directing the
<3"S^
Y
S«J
petitioner to have the accounts audited by the spec^it auclitor un<3er Sedtion142 (2A) of the Act would not arise.
(4)In view of the above, the petition fe dispesed of as havir^ bwomeunnecessary. Ordered acoordingfy.
Sd/-Chief Justice
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