High Court of Himachal Pradesh · Procedural orders
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ajay Kumar Sood Engineers and Contractors
OMP 1050/2024 in ITA 2/2019 ·
Clerical correction of the earlier withdrawal judgment; no adjudication of tax merits.
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
In OMP 1050/2024 within ITA 2/2019 involving Ajay Kumar Sood Engineers and Contractors, the Court identified a clerical error in its 23 October 2024 judgment and set out the replacement text.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
The replacement records Revenue counsel’s instructions to withdraw in view of Circular 9/2024 dated 17 September 2024 and disposal as withdrawn. The Court did not decide substantive tax grounds in this correction proceeding.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
The Registry was directed to correct the 23 October 2024 judgment in red ink and send the corrected judgment for uploading on the official website. The application was disposed of.
4. OUTCOME
The earlier withdrawal record was corrected. This application did not decide the merits of the underlying tax appeal.
5. Expert Comments
AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings.
The replacement text controls the corrected account
The Court expressly reproduces the withdrawal statement and resulting disposal. Those words, rather than speculation about the earlier clerical error, define the correction. The source does not reproduce the superseded text in full, so a detailed before-and-after merits narrative would be unsupported.
Source: PDF p.1
Correction and uploading are directions, not proof of execution
The Registry was told to amend the judgment and arrange uploading. This order by itself does not certify when the website was updated. The separately supplied 23 October copy is consistent with withdrawal, but the procedural dates should remain distinct.
Source: PDF p.1
The corrected disposal does not determine tax liability
The circular-based withdrawal remains the operative appeal result. No tax effect, assessment year or substantive issue is adjudicated here, and the correction gives no new permission for recovery, refund or reopening.
Source: PDF p.1
Source and verification
Complete source PDF reviewed: 1 physical pages.
Original PDF: 1 pages · SHA-256: ef618c4344932f7b7ece2194e20d337c22b597b516137e131b2f49a18cd6eb48
All 1 original pages read and visually inspected; all five panels audited.
No assessment year, tax-effect figure or numbered Income-tax Act provision is stated.
Subsequent treatment has not been independently verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.
General research only. Expert Comments are editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.
