Case LawHigh Court › Wpms/2468/2014 Of Mahavir Audhyogik v. C...

Wpms/2468/2014 Of Mahavir Audhyogik v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Haldwani And Others

High Court 05 Nov 2014 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Wpms/2468/2014 Of Mahavir Audhyogik v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Haldwani And Others
Date of order
05 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Wpms/2468/2014 Of Mahavir Audhyogik v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Haldwani And Others, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

WPMS No. 2468 of 2014 WPMS No. 2469 of 2014WPMS No. 2474 of 2014Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Gopal K. Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Asst. S.G. for the Union of India/respondent no. 3. Mr. H.M. Bhatia, Advocate for the Revenue. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are the developers of industrial park and as per the policy decision of the Central Government, petitioners are entitiled for the exemption of income tax under Section 80 IA of the Income Tax Act; application seeking exemption under Section 80 IA is pending disposal before the CBDT; during the pendency of the application seeking exemption, department has assessed the petitioners and appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the First Appellate Authority and now second appeal is pending disposal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi. He further contends that let CBDT take decision on the application seeking exemption under Section 80 IA within such time as this Court deems fit. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that against the seizure of the bank account, petitioner has alternate remedy to approach the ITAT in a pending appeal for the interim protection, therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw the petitions for the relief A with liberty to approach ITAT for interim protection. Writ petitions are permitted to be withdrawn for relief A with liberty to the petitioners to approach ITAT in pending appeal. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court requests CBDT to take appropriate decision on the application of the petitioners seeking exemption under Section 80 IA of the Income Tax Act in accordance with law at the earliest, in any case, within 90 days from the date copy of this order is communicated to CBDT. Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned counsel for the Revenue undertakes to communicate this order to CBDT. CLMA Nos. 12494, 12495 and 12496 of 2014 also stand disposed of accordingly. Deepak (Alok Singh, J.) 05.11.2014
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