M/S CHAITANYA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
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The High Court took the memo on record and, for the reasons stated therein, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.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, M/s Chaitanya Properties Private Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee subsequently filed a memo seeking to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee. The court's decision was based on the assessee's request to withdraw.
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 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
I.T.A. NO.600 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
M/S CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI. K.M.SRINIVASA MURTHY, NO.17, SANKEY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020 PAB: AACCC5900A ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(2), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.06.2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.1365/BANG/2015, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 PRAYING TO;
(a) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT;
(b) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’ BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1365/BANG/2015 DATED 30.06.2016 (ANNEXURE-A).
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Mr.S.Annamalai, learned counsel for Mr.M.Lava, learned counsel for the assessee.
Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.
Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal.
The aforesaid memo is taken on record. For the reasons assigned in the memo, the appeal is dismissed
3 as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same in case the occasion so arises.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
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 B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026