M/S KARNATAKA KSHATRIYA MARATHA PARISHATH vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

PDF · subscribers
ITA/31/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC01052264201215 March 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court took the memo on record and, for the reasons stated therein, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal if the occasion arises.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the ITAT. The assessee's counsel later filed a memo seeking to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal filed against the ITAT's order.

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 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI I. T. A. NO.31 OF 2012 BETWEEN: M/S KARNATAKA KSHATRIYA MARATHA PARISHATH SRI AMBABHAVANI KALYANA MANDIRA, AGRAHARA ROAD HASSAN-573 201 REPREENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI. N LEELA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SON OF SRI. N BHEEMA RAO … APPELLANT (BY SRI. JINITA CHATTARJEE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HASSAN RANGE HASSAN. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

2 THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 14.10.2011 PASSED IN ITA No.139/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005- 2006, PRAYING TO i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DATED 14.10.2011 PASSED BY THE ITAT IN ITA No.139/BANG/2011, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT

Ms. Jinita Chatterjee, learned counsel for Mr. S.Parthasarathi, learned counsel for the assessee.

Mr. Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for Mr. K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the Revenue. 2. Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal. 3. Aforesaid memo is taken on record. For the reasons assigned in the memo, the appeal is dismissed as

3 withdrawn with liberty to revive the same, if occasion so arises. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE RD

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 →