G. A. RAMASWAMY REDDY (HUF) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/646/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01046581201614 September 2021Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court granted the permission sought by the appellant to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. The appellant was granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the dispute is not settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. No decision was made on the merits of the original dispute. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to revive.

What were the facts?

The appellant, G A Ramaswamy Reddy (HUF), represented by its Kartha, Sri. G.R. Srinivasa Reddy, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was against an order dated 20/07/2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore Bench, in ITA No. 286/BANG/2014. The assessment year in question was 2008-2009. The respondent was the Income-Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Bangalore. The appellant subsequently filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, can be withdrawn by the appellant. (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The assessee (appellant) sought permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to revive it if the dispute is not settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. 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 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A. NO. OF 646/2016 BETWEEN: G A RAMASWAMY REDDY (HUF) REP BY KARTHA, SRI. G.R. SRINIVASA REDDY, # 173, GUNJUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE - 560 087 PAN: AANHR4650L

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. BHAIRAV KUTTAIAH FOR SRI. M. LAVA, ADVOCATES) AND: THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -7(3), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095

… RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20/07/2016 PASSED IN ITA NO. 286/BANG/2014, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 AND ETC.,

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, S.SUJATHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to revive, in case dispute is not settled under the scheme named the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. Memo is placed on record. Permission granted. Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought for.

Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE BVK

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →