Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ashok Chawla Vs. Union of Indian

Ashok Chawla vs Union of Indian

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 01, 2001
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/710326

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Case Number
CWP No. 1518 of 1997 and Cm Nos. 5728, 6718 Of 2000 1 August 2001
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

In the Delhi High Court Arijit Pasayat, CJ. & D.K. Jain, J. - - On an appropriate application being filed for consideration of the evidence, the Tribunal would do well to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, if they are related to the issues involved in the appeals.

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashok Chawla

Advocate O.S. Bajpai,;for the Revenu; R.D. Jolly and; Ms. Prem Lata

Respondent

Union of Indian

Legal References

Reported In
[2002]120TAXMAN801(Delhi)

Excerpt

in the delhi high court arijit pasayat, cj. & d.k. jain, j. - - on an appropriate application being filed for consideration of the evidence, the tribunal would do well to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, if they are related to the issues involved in the appeals.orderafter some hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the points urged in the writ petition should be permitted to be raised before the tribunal before whom it appeal nos. 5669, 5665, 5668 and 5666 (delhi) of 1996 are pending. we feel that the points raised are essentially factual in nature and though some questions of law are involved, they would depend upon the adjudication of connected factual aspects. thereforee, the tribunal shall permit the petitioner to urge such points as are available to be urged. it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that some additional material may be required to be placed for consideration of the tribunal. on an appropriate application being filed for consideration of the evidence, the tribunal would do well to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, if they are related to the issues involved in the appeals. we find that there were some interim orders passed by the tribunal and by order dated 29-5-1998 interim protection was granted to the assessed by this court. hearing of the appeals appears to have been deferred because of pendency of the writ petition. to avoid unnecessary delay, let the parties appear before the tribunal, without any further notice, on 21-8-2001 when the tribunal shall fix up a date for hearing of the appeals expeditiously. till disposal of the appeals, interim order dated 29-5-1998 shall be operative. we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the various issues raised in the writ petition., 2. the petition stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

ORDER

After some hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the points urged in the writ petition should be permitted to be raised before the Tribunal before whom IT Appeal Nos. 5669, 5665, 5668 and 5666 (Delhi) of 1996 are pending. We feel that the points raised are essentially factual in nature and though some questions of law are involved, they would depend upon the adjudication of connected factual aspects. thereforee, the Tribunal shall permit the petitioner to urge such points as are available to be urged. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that some additional material may be required to be placed for consideration of the Tribunal. On an appropriate application being filed for consideration of the evidence, the Tribunal would do well to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, if they are related to the issues involved in the appeals. We find that there were some interim orders passed by the Tribunal and by order dated 29-5-1998 interim protection was granted to the assessed by this court. Hearing of the appeals appears to have been deferred because of pendency of the writ petition. To avoid unnecessary delay, let the parties appear before the Tribunal, without any further notice, on 21-8-2001 when the Tribunal shall fix up a date for hearing of the appeals expeditiously. Till disposal of the appeals, interim order dated 29-5-1998 shall be operative. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the various issues raised in the writ petition.,

2. The petition stands disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial