M/S CENDUIT (INDIA) SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/985/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC01046387201709 January 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the appellant's counsel had filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw the appeal. The memo was taken on record. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. In light of the dismissal of the main appeal, the interlocutory application (I.A.No.1/2019) was rendered infructuous and was disposed of accordingly. No decision was made on the merits of the substantial questions of law that might have been raised.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s. Cenduit (India) Services Private Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order dated July 7, 2017, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in IT(TP)A Nos. 59/Bang/2016 and CO No. 57/Bang/2017, pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-2012. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent in the appeal is the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Bengaluru. The appellant sought to set aside the impugned order passed by the ITAT to the extent challenged in the present appeal.

What were the issues?

The High Court was presented with an appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order of the ITAT for Assessment Year 2011-2012. The specific substantial questions of law were to be set out in paragraph 19 of the appeal memo, which is not provided. The appellant sought to admit the appeal to answer these questions and set aside the ITAT's order. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by either the appellant or the respondent regarding the merits of the case, as the appeal was withdrawn.

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 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020

PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.985 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

M/S. CENDUIT (INDIA) SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, PRESTIGE NEBULA BLOCK, 1 & 2ND FLOOR, CUBBON ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001. PAN – AABC16552K …APPELLANT

(BY SRI.MALLAHA RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD – 2(1)(1), BENGALURU. …RESPONDENT

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

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260- A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.07.2017 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NOS.59/BANG/2016 AND CO NO.57/BANG/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012, PRAYING TO (i) ADMIT THE INSTANT APPEAL TO ANSWER THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW SET OUT IN PARA 19 ABOVE & (II) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-‘A’

2 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN IT (TP)A NOS.59/BANG/2016 AND CO NO.57/BANG/2017 DATED: 07.07.2017 RELATING ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 TO THE EXTENT CHALLENGED IN PRESENT APPEAL ETC.,

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:,

J U D G M E N T

Sri.Mallaha Rao, learned counsel for the appellant.

Sri.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the respondent.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal. The aforesaid memo is taken on record.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

In view dismissal of main appeal, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration. Hence, the same is disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE VM CT: SN

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 →