THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VENKATESHA EDUCATION SOCIETY

PDF · subscribers
ITA/258/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01023073201310 January 2023Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,G BASAVARAJA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, upon considering the memo filed by the respondent and the non-dispute by the Revenue's counsel, granted leave and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the settlement of the dispute under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, which rendered the appeal infructuous. The court did not delve into the merits of the original assessment or the ITAT's order. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, with no costs awarded. No issues were expressly left undecided, as the appeal itself was disposed of.

What were the facts?

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax and Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (Revenue) against an order dated December 21, 2012, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore. The ITAT's order had confirmed the order of the Appellate Commissioner, which in turn had confirmed the order of the Assistant Commissioner. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2009-2010. The respondent is M/s Venkatesha Education Society. A memo was filed by the respondent's counsel stating that the matter has been settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and nothing further survives in the appeal. The Revenue's counsel did not dispute this and requested the appeal be dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be dismissed as withdrawn, given that the matter has been settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and nothing survives for adjudication. The Revenue argued that the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn, as confirmed by their counsel who did not dispute the memo filed by the respondent. The respondent argued that the matter has been settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, rendering the appeal infructuous. No specific substantial questions of law were formulated or argued in the High Court as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

ITA No. 258 of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 258 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE …APPELLANTS

(BY SHRI. K.V. ARAVIND, SENIOR STANDING COUSNEL) AND: M/S VENKATESHA EDUCATION SOCIETY NO.125, ARMSTRONG ROAD SHIVAJI NAGR BANGALORE-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. S PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 21.12.2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.106/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.106/BANG/2012 DATED 21.12.2012 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE

Digitally signed by YASHODHA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

ITA No. 258 of 2013

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), BANGALORE AND ETC.

THIS ITA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Ms.Tanmayee Rajkumar, learned advocate for the respondent has filed memo dated 02.01.2023 stating that matter has been settled under Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and nothing survives in this appeal. 2. Shri K.V.Aravind, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the facts stated in the memo and prays that this appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn.

3.

Leave granted. This appeal is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

No costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

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 →