Swarankar Sang v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jalandhar and another - 2020-LL-0205-78

Citation	2020-LL-0205-78
Appellant Name	Swarankar Sang
Respondent Name	Commissioner of Income-tax, Jalandhar and another
Court	HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	05/02/2020
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	refusal of registration
Bot Summary:	Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondents. This petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Annexure P-14 order refusing registration to the petitioner under Section 12A(a) and writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.1 that registration be granted to the petitioner. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant states that despite his best efforts, he is unable to verify whether the petitioner is alive or not. In our opinion, since the case is pending for more than 20 years, no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending. The present petition stands dismissed as not pressed with CWP-3501-1999 2 liberty to the petitioner to revive the same if anything survives. Since the main case has been decided, the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) 1 IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) Date of Decision 5.2.2020 Swarankar Sang, Nawanshahr Petitioner Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and another Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing counsel for respondents. AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India for issuance of appropriate writ in nature of certiorari quashing impugned Annexure P-14 order refusing registration to petitioner under Section 12A(a) and writ in nature of mandamus directing respondent No.1 that registration be granted to petitioner. 2. At very outset, learned counsel for appellant states that despite his best efforts, he is unable to verify whether petitioner is alive or not. 3. In our opinion, since case is pending for more than 20 years, no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending. Consequently, present petition stands dismissed as not pressed with CWP-3501-1999 (O&M) 2 liberty to petitioner to revive same if anything survives. 4. Since main case has been decided, pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 5.2.2020 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned - Yes/No Whether reportable - Yes/No Swarankar Sang v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jalandhar and another

Metadata

Judgment