MRS HOGETHOPPALU BASAVARAJA SETTY KOWSALYA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/180/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01014009202010 February 2021Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the memo filed by the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the writ petition. The memo stated the petitioner's intention to file an application for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and requested liberty to seek restoration of the writ petition if the settlement did not materialize. In light of this memo, the High Court ordered the petition to be dismissed. However, liberty was reserved for the petitioner to initiate proceedings regarding the same cause of action if the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme did not materialize. The court also overruled office objections.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mrs. Hogethoppalu Basavaraja Setty Kowsalya, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order of assessment for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Chitradurga, under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following proceedings initiated under Section 148. The petitioner also sought to quash the consequential demand notice. The assessment order disposed of objections filed by the petitioner against the assessment proceedings. The matter came up for orders before the High Court on February 10, 2021.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner should be permitted to be withdrawn. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition to file an application for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The petitioner requested liberty to avail the benefits of the Scheme and to seek restoration of the writ petition if the settlement did not materialize. The respondent, the Income Tax Officer, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the withdrawal request.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION No.180/2021 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

Mrs. Hogethoppalu Basavaraja Setty Kowsalya W/o H.Basavaraja Setty Aged about 64 years, Residing at: Bhadra Sai, JCR Extension Chitradurga.

… Petitioner

(By Sri Harish V.S., Advocate)

AND:

The Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward 1, Aayakar Bhavan, Tamatkal Road, Medehally, Chitradurga - 577 502.

… Respondent

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order of assessment passed by the respondent disposing of the objections filed by the petitioner dated 10.12.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15 vide Annexure-D and consequently declare that the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act against the petitioner for the assessment year 2014-15, is illegal and bad in law and quash the impugned order of assessment passed by the respondent under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act dated 23.12.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15 i.e., Annexure-F and the consequential demand notice issued by the respondent dated

2 23.12.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15, i.e., Annexure-G and etc.

This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:

ORDER

Petitioner has filed a memo, which reads as follows: "The petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to withdraw the above writ petition, granting leave/liberty to the petitioner to file an application for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, and avail the benefit of the Scheme and further reserving liberty to seek restoration of the above writ petition at an appropriate stage, in an event the settlement under the Scheme does not materialise so as to meet the ends of justice."

2.

In light of the said memo, petition is dismissed. Liberty is reserved to initiate proceedings regarding the same cause of action, if settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme does not materialise.

In light of the memo filed, office objections are overruled.

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →