THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOMET AX-3 vs. M/S INDIANOIL SKYTANKING PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/572/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC01046758202323 September 2024Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in its oral judgment, observed that in view of an order made in a companion case, W.A.N.960/2023, the present appeal had become infructuous. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of on this basis. The court did not delve into the merits of the grounds raised by the appellant or the findings of the learned Single Judge. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal that becomes infructuous due to a decision in a related matter is to be disposed of accordingly, without a substantive decision on its own grounds. No specific issue was expressly left undecided, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s. Stumpp Schuele and Somappa Private Limited, represented by its Director, filed a Writ Appeal before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeal challenged a portion of the judgment passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 21146/2019, specifically findings in paragraph 10. The appellant sought to set aside these findings and requested the learned Single Judge to adjudicate other grounds raised in the writ petition. The respondent in the appeal was the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU Circle-2. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, and was heard for preliminary hearing.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned Single Judge erred in its findings in paragraph 10 of the judgment in Writ Petition No. 21146/2019, to the extent they were against the appellant? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the learned Single Judge ought to have adjudicated the various other grounds raised by the appellant in the writ petition? (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The appellant argued that the learned Single Judge's findings in paragraph 10 were incorrect and that the remaining grounds raised in the writ petition should have been adjudicated. The appellant sought to set aside the adverse findings and have the other grounds considered. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in this appeal. However, the revenue was the respondent and would have likely defended the order of the learned Single Judge.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5999-DB WA No. 572 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA WRIT APPEAL NO. 572 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

M/S. STUMPP SCHUELE AND SOMAPPA PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI. GANESH KAMATH KOKKARNE, S/O. SRI. RAMDAS KAMATH KOKKARNE, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, PLOT NO.4, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-560 037, PAN: AACCS2285G …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE) AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE-2, 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y.V. AND SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATES)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT HELD AGAINST THE APPELLANT

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5999-DB WA No. 572 of 2023

BY LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN PARA 10 OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION NO.21146/2019 DATED 03.03.2023 AND DIRECT THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE TO ADJUDICATE THE VARIOUS OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE WRIT PETITION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)

In view of the order made in companion case in W.A.N.960/2023, this appeal has become infructuous and accordingly, is disposed of.

Sd/- (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →