SYED ABUBACKER RIYAZ vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/100087/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC02014057201625 March 2021Bench: SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, did not decide the substantial question of law on merits. The judgment records that the learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. The memo was placed on record, and consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No findings were made on the correctness of the ITAT's order or the Principal Commissioner's order under Section 263. The assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer was also not confirmed on merits. The operative direction was solely to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Shri. Syed Abubacker Riyaz, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal challenged an order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Panaji, and an order dated 29.03.2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Belagavi, under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant sought to set aside these orders and confirm the assessment order dated 07.01.2014 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Belagavi, for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. The respondent was the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Belagavi. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated.

What were the issues?

The substantial question of law for the High Court to decide was whether to allow the appeal by answering the substantial question of law in favour of the appellant. This involved setting aside the order of the ITAT dated 28.07.2016 and the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax dated 29.03.2016 passed under Section 263, and consequently confirming the assessment order dated 07.01.2014. The appellant argued for the allowance of the appeal and setting aside of the impugned orders. The revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, would have likely argued for the upholding of the ITAT and Section 263 orders. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities by either side are recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021 PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

I.T.A. NO. 100087/2016

BETWEEN:

SHRI. SYED ABUBACKER RIYAZ, C/O: S M STEELS, KARNATAKA GARAGE, 4278, PATIL GALLI, BELAGAVI.

… APPELLANT

(BY SRI.SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 3RD FLOOR, PHIROZ KHIMJI COMPLEX, OPP. CIVIL HOSPITAL, Dr. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELAGAVI – 590001. ….RESPONDENT (BY SRI. Y. V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 260A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY ANSWERING THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 28.07.2016 PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI AN ITA NO.103/PAN/2016 ALSO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 29.03.2016 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BELAGAVI IN NO.F.NO.28/263/CIT/BGM/2014-15 U/S.263 OF THE

2 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONFIRM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), BELAGAVI DATED: 07.01.2014 FOR THE ASSESSTMENT YEAR 2011-2012 AND ETC.,

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR. J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the appellant files a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. Memo is placed on record. Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

SD JUDGE

SD JUDGE

CLK

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →