M/S. KANAKADAS PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

ITA/100002/2020HC KarnatakaKAHC02004441202014 March 2024Bench: M.I.ARUN,UMESH M ADIGA2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The Court observed that the office objections, raised since the filing of the appeal in 2020, remained uncomplied with. Furthermore, the advocate for the appellant was absent on the day of the hearing, leading the Court to infer that the appellant was not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without delving into the merits of the case or the substantial questions of law that might have been formulated. No specific findings were made on any substantive tax issues.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s. Kanakadas Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, filed an Income Tax Appeal (ITA) No. 100002 of 2020 before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated 23.12.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA No. 1187/Bang/2019 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The respondents are the Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1, Bagalkot; the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Belagavi; and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration), Belagavi. The appeal was listed for orders. The High Court noted that office objections had not been complied with since the filing of the appeal in 2020, and the advocate for the appellant was absent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with office objections and absence of the appellant's counsel, thereby indicating a lack of interest in prosecuting the appeal? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee's counsel. The absence of the counsel and non-compliance with office objections led to the dismissal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue's counsel. The revenue would likely support the dismissal of the appeal on the grounds of non-prosecution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC-D:5228-DB ITA No. 100002 of 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 100002 OF 2020 BETWEEN: M/S. KANAKADAS PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT OPP: TAHASILDAR OFFICE, POST: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, R/BY ITS MANAGER, SHRI.PRASHANTH S/O NAGUSHA, SINGRI, AGED ABOUT: 33 YEARS. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 1, C.R. BUILDING, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), KIMJI BAI BUILDING, OPP-CIVIL HOSPITAL, BELAGAVI-590001.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ADMINISTRATION), KIMJI BAI BUILDING, OPP-CIVIL HOSPITAL, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y V RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/SEC.260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO, A. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE. B. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ORDER DATED 23.12.2019 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, ”SMC-A” BENCH, BENGALURU IN ITA NO. 1187/bang/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 VIDE ANNEXURE-A & ETC.,

VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.03.14 15:05:27 +0530

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC-D:5228-DB ITA No. 100002 of 2020

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, M.I.ARUN, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The appeal is of the year 2020. Till today the office objections are not complied with.

The Advocate for the appellant is absent. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/- JUDGE

VNP/CT:VP LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 21

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →