ITTINA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal, disposing of the case. Liberty was granted to the assessee to seek revival of the appeal if necessary.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the dispute was settled under the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme. The assessee then filed a memo seeking to withdraw the appeal.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the withdrawal of an appeal 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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND 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.112 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
ITTINA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED NO.380, OPP. CPWD QUARTERS 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560034. .... APPELLANT (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W MR. RAVISHANKAR, ADV., FOR MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,)
AND:
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING ANNEX QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. DILEEP KUMAR, ADV., FOR 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 31.10.2013 PASSED ITA NO.132/BANG/2012 & CO NO.37/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, PRAYING TO (i) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION 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 INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH IN ITA NO.132/BANG/2012 & CO NO.37/BANG/2012 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 DATED 31.10.2013.
THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri. A. Shankar, learned Senior Counsel along with Sri. Ravishankar, learned counsel for Sri. M Lava, learned counsel for the assessee.
Sri. Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the revenue.
Learned Senior Counsel for the assessee submits that the dispute involved in this appeal has been settled under ‘Vivad se Vishwas’ scheme and has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the appeal. The aforesaid memo is placed on record.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the assessee to seek revival of the same in case of occasion so arises.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-
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 →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026