M/S BANGALORE ELECTRICITY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
ITA/587/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01042000201901 April 2021Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the memo filed by the appellant and dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. The appellant was granted liberty to seek revival of the appeals if necessary.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court. The appellant later informed the court that they had opted for the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal due to the appellant opting for the Vivad Se Viswas 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 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ITA NO.587/2019

BETWEEN:

M/S. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, CHIKKABALLAPUR DIVISION OFFICE, B.B. ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPUR-562 101, PAN:AACCJ2951N. …APPELLANT

(BY SMT. C. PADMAVATHY, PARTY-IN-PERSON)

AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS CIRCLE-1(1), HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 032. …RESPONDENT

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 27/03/2019, PASSED IN ITA NO.1016 AND 1017/BANG/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AND 2012-13 RESPECTIVELY AND PRAYING TO (A) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT (B) DIRECT THE TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER THE ISSUES NOT ADJUDICATED BY THEM AND TO THAT EXTENT HOLD THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS BAD IN LAW, IN THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU ‘A’ BENCH IN ITA NO.1016 AND 1017/BANG/2018 DATED 27/03/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-

12 AND 2012-13 RESPECTIVELY, ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT CERTAIN OTHER ISSUES WERE NOT ACADEMIC AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Smt. C. Padmavathy, Deputy General Manager of BESCOM (CT & GST), who appeared in person has fairly stated before this Court that the appellant-Company has approached the Department under the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.

2.

A memo has been filed by the Deputy General Manager, praying for withdrawal of the appeals as the appellant-Company has opted for Vivad Se Viswas Scheme with liberty to seek revival, if need arises.

3.

The memo is accepted.

4.

The appeal/s is/are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for in the memo.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE TL

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →