M/S MAHALAKSHMI CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted the assessee's submission regarding the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and the issuance of Form 3. Consequently, the Court allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Mahalakshmi Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The assessee later approached the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and received Form 3 under the scheme.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the assessee's intent to withdraw the appeal due to participation in the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.681 OF 2016 BETWEEN: M/S. MAHALAKSHMI CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER SRI. RAMAPPA B. KUNDAR HO, I FLOOR, SHIVA KRUPA BUILDING WEST BLOCK, MARUTHI VEETHIKA UDUPI-576101. .... APPELLANT (BY MR. NARENDRA SHARMA, ADV., FOR MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN ADI UDUPI, MALPE ROAD UDUPI-576103. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 26.08.2016 PASSED
2 IN ITA NO.263/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, PRAYING TO: (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOR OF THE APPELLANT. (ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS, TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT, IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENGALURU BENCH, 'C' BENGALURU IN ITA NO.263/BANG/2013 DATED 26.08.2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. (iii) PASS SUCH ORDERS, AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Mr.Narendra Sharma, learned counsel for the assessee. Mr.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee has approached under the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and Form 3 under the scheme has been issued. He, therefore, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal and has filed a memo in this regard. The aforesaid memo is taken on record.
3 2. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the assessee to revive the same if occasion so arises. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV
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. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026