M/S VIDYA POULTRY FARM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/426/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01041222201628 January 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, after considering a memo filed by the learned Senior Counsel for the assessee seeking leave to withdraw the appeal, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The Court 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 that were intended to be formulated, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground. The reasoning for the withdrawal was stated to be in the memo, which was taken on record by the Court.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Vidya Poultry Farm, represented by its partner Sri. G.M. Swamydeva, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The appeal was against a common order dated 13.04.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru Bench, in ITA No.1107/BANG/2014 and C.O.No.218/BANG/2015. This order pertained to the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue was represented by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chitradurga. The High Court was to consider substantial questions of law.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the High Court should formulate substantial questions of law and answer them in favour of the appellant (assessee). The assessee, through its learned Senior Counsel, sought to withdraw the appeal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue regarding the substantial questions of law or the merits of the case. The core of the matter was the assessee's decision to withdraw the appeal, which was filed against the ITAT's order for assessment year 2011-12.

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 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.426 OF 2016 BETWEEN: M/S. VIDYA POULTRY FARM REP. BY ITS PARTNER SRI. G.M. SWAMYDEVA H.R. ROAD, MOLAKALMURU CHALLAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577535. .... APPELLANT (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN TAMATAKAL ROAD, MEDEHALLY CHITRADURGA-577502. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. DILIP 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 13.04.2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.1107/BANG/2014 AND C.O.NO.218/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, PRAYING TO: (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT.

2 (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU BENCH, "C", BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1107/BANG/2014 AND C.O. NO.218/BANG/2015 DATED 13.04.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ANNEURE- A & ETC. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.A.Shankar, learned Senior counsel for Mr.M.Lava, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Learned Senior counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal. The aforesaid memo is taken on record. 2. For the reasons assigned in the memo, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same if the 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 →