M/S WINTAC LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/318/2010HC KarnatakaKAHC01057131201022 October 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the appellant's request to withdraw the appeal. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal if the occasion arises.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Wintac Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal. This was based on the ground that an application had already been submitted under the 'Vivad se Vishwas' Scheme.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the appellant's request to withdraw the appeal due to participation in the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

I.T.A. NO.318 OF 2010

BETWEEN:

M/S. WINTAC LIMITED NO.163, RESERVOIR ST., BASAVANGUDI BANGALORE – 560 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS G.M.(FINANCE) & SECRETARY SRI B.P. THYAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SON OF SRI T.PUTTASWAMY …APPELLANT (BY SRI BALRAM R.RAO, ADV.)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 12(5), 14/2, RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN 4TH FLR. NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 12-04- 2010 PASSED IN ITA NO.724/BANG/2009 & C.O. NO.44/BNG/2009, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001- 2002 PRAYING TO:- I. FORMULATED THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.724/BANG/2009 & C.O. NO.44/BNG/2009, DATE 12- 04-2010.

THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr.Balram R. Rao, learned counsel for the appellant.

Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal, on the ground that the appellant has already submitted an application under ‘Vivad se Vishwas’ Scheme, with liberty to revive the same.

3.

In view of aforesaid submission, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same in case occasion so arises.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

dn/- CT-HR

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 →