S. C. Mittal v. Director General of Income-tax
[Citation -2019-LL-1209-16]

Citation 2019-LL-1209-16
Appellant Name S. C. Mittal
Respondent Name Director General of Income-tax
Court HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 09/12/2019
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags charging of interest
Bot Summary: AJAY TEWARI, J. This is an application seeking permission to withdraw the main petition. This petition has been filed praying for quashing of the recovery notice dated 27.6.2014. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent has very fairly stated that the issue regarding the ownership of the jewellery which was the subject matter of this writ petition is in favour of the petitioner. We further find that the second issue of charging of interest under 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-12-2019 13:04:16 ::: CM-10078-CWP-2019 2 CWP-16367-2014 Section 220 and waiver under Section 220 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has not been finalized by the competent authority till date. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw this petition with a further prayer that as regards the issue of the interest mentioned above the competent authority be directed to decide it at the earliest. The petition stands dismissed as withdrawn at this stage with liberty to the learned counsel for the petitioner to establish claim of the ownership of the jewellery before the competent authority and with a direction to the competent authority to decide the issue under Section 220(2) and Section 220 of the Act within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner would be at liberty to raise all the issues before the competent authority.


CM-10078-CWP-2019 1 CWP-16367-2014 (O&M) IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 226 CM-10078-CWP-2019 CWP-16367-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision : 9.12.2019 Sh. S.C.Mittal Proprietor of M/s Roxy Industrial Corporation Petitioner Versus Director General of Income Tax Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE LALIT BATRA *** Present : Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for applicant-petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Katoch,Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Advocate for respondent. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) This is application seeking permission to withdraw main petition. On oral request of both learned counsel, main case is taken up for hearing today itself. This petition has been filed praying for quashing of recovery notice dated 27.6.2014 (Annexure P-19). At this stage, learned counsel for respondent has very fairly stated that issue regarding ownership of jewellery which was subject matter of this writ petition is in favour of petitioner. We further find that second issue of charging of interest under 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-12-2019 13:04:16 ::: CM-10078-CWP-2019 2 CWP-16367-2014 (O&M) Section 220 (2) and waiver under Section 220 (2A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 has not been finalized by competent authority till date. In these circumstances, learned counsel for petitioner prays for permission to withdraw this petition with further prayer that as regards issue of interest mentioned above competent authority be directed to decide it at earliest. Learned counsel for Revenue has no objection if this prayer is allowed by this Court. Consequently, petition stands dismissed as withdrawn at this stage with liberty to learned counsel for petitioner to establish claim of ownership of jewellery before competent authority and with direction to competent authority to decide issue under Section 220(2) and Section 220 (2A) of Act within period of two months from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. petitioner would be at liberty to raise all issues before competent authority. In view of order passed above, application bearing CM- 10078-CWP-2019 stands dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. Since main case has been dismissed as withdrawn, pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (LALIT BATRA) JUDGE 9.12.2019 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned - Yes/No Whether reportable - Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-12-2019 13:04:16 ::: S. C. Mittal v. Director General of Income-tax
Report Error