M/S BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court accepted the memo filed by the appellant praying for withdrawal of the appeal. The court granted liberty to seek revival of the appeal if needed.
What were the facts?
The appellant, M/s. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The appellant's representative stated that the company has opted for the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal due to the appellant opting for the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ITA NO.554/2019 BETWEEN:
M/S. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, NO.66, LAGGERE, 3RD PHASE, PEENYA, BANGALORE-560 058, PAN:AACCJ2951N. …APPELLANT
(BY SMT. C. PADMAVATHY, PARTY-IN-PERSON)
AND:
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS CIRCLE-1(1), HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 032. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 27/03/2019, PASSED IN ITA NO.624, 625, 626, 627 AND 628/BANG/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 AND 2015-16 RESPECTIVELY AND PRAYING TO (A) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT (B) DIRECT THE TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER THE ISSUES NOT ADJUDICATED BY THEM AND TO THAT EXTENT HOLD THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS BAD IN LAW, IN THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU ‘A’ BENCH IN ITA NO.624, 625, 626, 627 AND 628/BANG/2018 DATED 27/03/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 AND 2015-16 RESPECTIVELY, ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE
THE OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT CERTAIN OTHER ISSUES WERE NOT ACADEMIC AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Smt. C. Padmavathy, Deputy General Manager of BESCOM (CT & GST), who appeared in person has fairly stated before this Court that the appellant-Company has approached the Department under the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.
A memo has been filed by the Deputy General Manager, praying for withdrawal of the appeal as the appellant-Company has opted for Vivad Se Viswas Scheme with liberty to seek revival, if need arises.
The memo is accepted.
The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for in the memo. Pending IAs, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE TL
More judgments on Section 260-A
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026