SRI MAHENDRASINH RAMSINH JADAV vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/876/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01055600201823 August 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the assessee filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the appeal. The memo was placed on record. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn in terms of the memo. No decision was made on the substantial questions of law or the merits of the ITAT's order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the assessee, Sri Mahendrasinh Ramsinh Jadav, against an order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year in question is 2010-2011. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, challenging the ITAT's order dated August 21, 2018, bearing ITA No. 32/BANG/2018. The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru heard the appeal. The revenue was represented by the Income-Tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(5). The assessee's counsel filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial questions of law, as stated in the appeal, warrant consideration by the High Court? (Question of law) 2. Whether the order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 21, 2018, in ITA No. 32/BANG/2018 for the assessment year 2010-2011, is to be set aside? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee's counsel filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal. No specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the merits of the case. Revenue's contentions: The revenue was represented by its counsel. No specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the merits of the case.

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 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ITA NO.876 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SRI MAHENDRASINH RAMSINH JADAV, SON OF SRI RAMSINH JADAV, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, NO.1-104 BRIGADE METROPOLIS, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560048. ... APPELLANT PAN: ACZPJ4415H. (BY MISS JINITHA CHATARJI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(5), HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560032. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 21.08.2018 PASSED IN ITA NO. 32/BANG/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-2011, PRAYING TO:

2 (A) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE; (B) SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 21.08.2018 BEARING ITA NO. 32/BANG/2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011; AND ETC., THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Miss Jinitha Chaterjee, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr. E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the revenue. Learned counsel for the assessee file a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal. The aforesaid memo is placed on record. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the memo. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE HR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →