M/S BANGALORE ELECTRICITY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
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The High Court accepted the memo filed by the appellant and dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.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?
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.
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.
The memo is accepted.
The appeal/s is/are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for in the memo.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE TL
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 Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026