LATE SRI L SOHANRAJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/360/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01030395201329 March 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the assessee had filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal. The reason provided for withdrawal was that the dispute had been amicably settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The Court took the aforesaid memo on record. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court also granted liberty to the assessee to revive the appeal if the occasion arises. No decision was made on the merits of the substantial questions of law.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the legal representatives of the late Sri. L. Sohanraj against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'B' Bench, Bangalore, dated March 15, 2013. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 1994-95. The assessee sought to set aside the ITAT's order. The matter was listed for hearing before the High Court of Karnataka. The revenue was represented by its counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial questions of law, as stated in the appeal, should be formulated by the Court. (Question of law) 2. Whether the order passed by the ITAT, 'B' Bench, Bangalore, in ITA No.355/Bang/2012 and C.O.74/Bang/2012 dated March 15, 2013, should be set aside. (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The learned counsel for the assessee filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal on the ground that the dispute has been amicably settled under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. Revenue's contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the 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

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL I.T.A. NO.360 OF 2013 BETWEEN: LATE SRI. L. SOHANRAJ REP. BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SRI. S. NEMICHAND SRI. S. BHARATRAJ & SRI. S. SAJJANRAJ #34, MAMULPET, BANGALORE-560053. .... APPELLANT (BY MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN #59, BELLARY ROAD, GANGENHALLI BANGALORE-560032. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. DILEEP KUMAR, ADV., FOR MR. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 15.03.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.355/BANG/2012 AND C.O.74/BANG/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95, PRAYING TO: (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN.

2 (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'B' BENCH, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.355/BANG/2012 AND C.O.74/BANG/2012 DATED 15.03.2013. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.M.Lava, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal on the ground that the dispute has been amicably settled under Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The aforesaid memo is taken on record. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the assessee to revive the same if occasion so arises. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV

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 →