SHRI.SHASHIKANT S. SIDNAL vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/108513/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC02001605201922 August 2024Author: JYOTI MULIMANI3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the memo filed. The counsel for the petitioner affirmed that the petitioner had taken a conscious decision to withdraw the petition and would not seek recalling of any order. Based on this submission and the memo, the Court found no impediment to allowing the withdrawal. Consequently, the High Court ordered that the Writ Petition be dismissed as withdrawn. No specific findings on the merits of the original petition were made, as the matter was disposed of solely on the petitioner's request for withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri. Shashikant.S.Sidnal, filed a Writ Petition No. 108513 of 2019 before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Belagavi, and other Income Tax authorities. The petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking certain reliefs. The matter was listed for orders on August 22, 2024. The petitioner's counsel appeared and submitted a memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition. The counsel confirmed that the petitioner had taken a conscious decision to withdraw and would not seek recalling of any order passed.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. The petitioner argued that they had made a conscious decision to withdraw the petition and requested that the memo be placed on record and the petition be dismissed as withdrawn. The respondents were represented, and no specific arguments were recorded from their side regarding the withdrawal, other than their presence. The court's decision hinged on whether to allow the withdrawal as requested by the petitioner.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 108513 OF 2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

SHRI. SHASHIKANT.S.SIDNAL, HOUSE NO.7309, ANJANEYA NAGAR, ANJANEYA NAGAR (MM EXTENSION), BELAGAVI-590 016. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA AND SRI. H.R.KAMBIYAVAR., ADVOCATES)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BELAGAVI.

THE PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV), 3RD FLOOR, TRISTAR BUILDING, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA-403 001.

THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV), UNIT-II, 3RD FLOOR, TRISTAR BUILDING, PATTO, PANAJI, GOA-403 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.V.RAVIRAJ AND SRI. M.THIRUMALESH., ADVOCATES)

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

Sri.Prasanna., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Ashok A.Kulkarni., for the petitioner and Sri.M.Thirumalesh., learned counsel for the respondents have appeared in person. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a memo has been filed stating that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the petition. Counsel therefore, submits that the memo may be placed on record and the petition may be dismissed as withdrawn. When queried by the Court, counsel Sri.Prasanna., submits that the petitioner has taken a conscious decision to withdraw the petition and he shall not seek recalling of the order if an order is passed. The oral submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the memo is placed on record.

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →