THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SRI T KRISHNAMURTHY
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court took on record the submission regarding settlement under the Vivad-se-Vishwas scheme. The Revenue sought permission to withdraw the appeal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court challenging an ITAT order. The assessee's counsel informed the court that the dispute had been settled under the Vivad-se-Vishwas scheme.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is to be withdrawn due to settlement under the Vivad-se-Vishwas scheme.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 APRIL, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
I.T.A. No. 147/2012
BETWEEN : --------------
The Commissioner of Income Tax
C.R. Building
Queens Road
Bangalore.
The Dy. Commissioner of
Income Tax Circle – 2(1) C.R. Building
Queens Road
Bangalore.
… APPELLANTS
(By Sri. K.V. Aravind, Adv.,)
AND : -------
Sri. T. Krishnamurthy Since deceased represented by his
2 L/R Smt. N. Shashikala No. 54, Timber Yard Layout Mysore Road Bangalore.
… RESPONDENT
(By Sri. S. Annamalai, Adv., for Sri. M. Lava, Adv.)
---
This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act 1961 with a prayer to set aside the order dated 20.01.2012 passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in IT(SS)A No. 2/Bang/2010 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and etc.
This I.T.A. coming on for Final Hearing this day, ALOK ARADHE J, delivered the following;
J U D G M E N T
Sri. K.V. Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.
Sri. S. Annamalai, learned counsel for the assessee.
Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo stating that the dispute involved in the appeal has been settled under the Vivad-se-Vishwas scheme.
The aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the assessee is taken on record.
3 3. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the revenue seeks leave of the Court to withdraw the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same in case occasion so arises.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
LRS.
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 →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026