THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. PANCHAMUKHI CONSTRUCTION

PDF · subscribers
ITA/100133/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC02009384201516 December 2015Bench: S.ABDUL NAZEER,P.S.DINESH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the appeal. The learned counsel for the Appellants (Revenue) submitted that he did not press the appeal, citing Circular No. 21/2015 dated December 10, 2015. The High Court placed the submission of the learned counsel on record. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The specific reasoning behind the Revenue's decision not to press the appeal, or the contents of the cited circular, are not elaborated upon in the judgment. No issues were expressly left undecided as the appeal was withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer (Appellants) against M/s. Panchamukhi Construction (Respondent). The appeal challenges an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, in ITA No.265/PNJ/2014, dated March 12, 2015. The Appellants sought to set aside the Tribunal's order and confirm the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Belgaum. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history leading to this appeal is not detailed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be allowed and the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside, confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), as per Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (Respondent). Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel for the Appellants (Revenue) submitted that he does not press this appeal in view of Circular No. 21/2015 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt), dated December 10, 2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR ITA No.100133 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARN -1(1), BELAGAVI BELGAUM ... APPELLANTS (By Sri. Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND: M/S. PANCHAMUKHI CONSTRUCTION 299/6, VIMAL, GOODSHED ROAD BELGAUM PAN: AAJFP3248E ... RESPONDENT THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE `INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO (a) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED ABOVE; (b) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE

2 INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH PANAJI, IN ITA NO.265/PNJ/2014, DTD:12.03.2015 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME (APPEALS), BELGAUM. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Sri Y.V.Raviraj, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that he does not press this appeal in view of the circular No.21/2015 in F.No.279/ Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt), dated 10.12.2015. 2. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is placed on record. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE.

Sd/- JUDGE. YN.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →