SRI. P. N. MANJUNATH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/246/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01003996201818 January 2021Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellant had filed a Memo for withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the High Court allowed the Memo for withdrawal and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No decision on the merits of the case was made. The Court granted liberty to the appellant to file a fresh appeal in the future if the need arose. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Sri P.N. Manjunath, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal was against an order dated 31.05.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA Nos. 29 and 30/Bang/2015. These appeals before the ITAT pertained to the assessment years 2006-2007 and 2008-2009. The respondents in the High Court appeal were the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer. The appellant sought to set aside the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

The substantial questions of law were to be formulated by the High Court. The appellant sought to allow the appeal and set aside the order of the ITAT. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the appellant or the revenue before the High Court. The primary procedural event was the appellant's subsequent filing of a Memo for withdrawal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

I.T.A. NO.246/2018

BETWEEN:

SRI. P. N. MANJUNATH S/O. LATE SRI. NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, NO.190, SOUNDARYA DAMINI, 4TH CROSS, 4TH PHASE, DOLLARS COLONY, J. P. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 078.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI MALLAHARAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CR BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU.

2.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITO – WARD 4 (3) (3)

KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. … RESPONDENTS

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2016 PASSED IN ITA NOS.29 AND 30/BANG/2015, FOR THE

ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-2007 AND 2008-2009 VIDE ANNEXURE- A., PRAYING TO (1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE (2) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 31.05.2016 BEARING ITA NOS. 29 AND 30/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-2007 AND 2008-2009 VIDE ANNEXURE- A (3) PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a Memo for withdrawal of the appeal.

The same is allowed. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

The Memo be placed on record. Liberty is also granted to file a fresh appeal, in case need so arise in future.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

hnm

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →