MRS LATHA PUTTANNA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/972/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01046369201707 April 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, while hearing the appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, noted that the assessee's counsel had filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal. The Court took the memo on record and, for the reasons assigned therein, disposed of the appeal as withdrawn. The Court granted the assessee liberty to revive the appeal if occasion arose. No decision on the merits of the substantial questions of law was made, as the appeal was withdrawn by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mrs. Latha Puttanna, proprietrix of Shrishti, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order dated July 7, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bengaluru Bench. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2011-2012. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The High Court was to consider substantial questions of law and decide the appeal. However, the assessee subsequently filed a memo seeking to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the substantial questions of law, as stated in the appeal, are to be formulated and answered in favour of the appellant. The assessee's contention, as indicated by the filing of the appeal, was to set aside the findings of the ITAT to the extent they were against the assessee. The specific grounds and arguments presented by the assessee and the revenue before the High Court are not detailed in the provided judgment, as the appeal was withdrawn at the hearing. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by either side on the merits of the case.

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 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

I.T.A. NO.972/2017 BETWEEN:

MRS. LATHA PUTTANNA PROPRIETRIX: SHRISHTI # 592, UPPER PALACE ORCHARD, OPP: SWIMMING POOL, SADASHIVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 080 PAN:ALMPP6213F ...APPELLANT (BY SRI V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI M. LAVA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRLCE-8(1), PRESENTLY CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 095 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI DILEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX APPEAL ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:07/07/2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.1691/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012 PRAYING (i) TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME

IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT (ii) TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU 'C' BENCH, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1691(BANG)2016 DATED:07/07/2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Shri V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for Shri M.Lava, learned counsel for the assessee.

Shri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for Shri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.

Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal.

The aforesaid memo is taken on record.

For the reasons assigned in the memo, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with the liberty to revive the same, in case occasion so arises.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE CA

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 →