M/S ARCHIDPLY INDUSTRIES LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/415/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC01052318201215 July 2021Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellant seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The reason for withdrawal was that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The appellant was granted liberty to approach the High Court again if the need arose in the future. No decision on the merits of the case was made.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s Archidply Industries Ltd, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order dated July 31, 2012, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.1079/Bang/2011. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2008-09. The respondent was the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1). The appellant sought to set aside the findings of the ITAT to the extent they were against the appellant. Subsequently, the appellant filed a memo before the High Court stating their intention to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be allowed to be withdrawn. Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through their learned counsel, filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The reason cited for withdrawal was that the assessee had approached the Income Tax Department 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

ITA NO.415/2012

BETWEEN

M/S ARCHIDPLY INDUSTRIES LTD REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI. SHYAM DAGA NO.29/2, G.K. MANOR 1ST FLOOR, NEHRU CIRCLE SHESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE ...APPELLANT

(By SRI : M LAVA, ADVOCATE)

AND

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(1) NRUPATHUNGA ROAD R.P. BHAVAN, OPP. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA BANGALORE-01

…RESPONDENT

(By SRI : K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 31/07/2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.1079/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE

EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1079/BANG/2011 DATED 31/07/2012 AND ETC.

THIS ITA IS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

A memo has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant for withdrawal of the appeal as the assessee has approached the Income Tax Department under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

The memo is accepted. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the appellant to approach this Court in case need so arises in future.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

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 →