JOHN CRANE SEALING SYSTEMS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/90/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01034227201807 April 2021Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL3 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The High Court took the memo on record and, for the reasons stated therein, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The assessee was granted liberty to revive the appeal if the occasion arose.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee's counsel later 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?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7TH 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.90/2018

BETWEEN:

JOHN CRANE SEALING SYSTEMS INDIA P. LTD. PRESENTLY AT NO.11, I PHASE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA BANGALORE-560 058 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS FINANCE DIRECTOR MR. AMOL.S.DEORUKHKAR (PREVIOUSLY AT 1, GROUND FLOOR, 'CASA BLANCA', 6, CASA MAJOR ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI-600 008) PAN NO.AAACJ2131J ...APPELLANT

(BY MS.MAHIMA GOUD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

COMPANY CIRCLE -2(2)

ROOM NO.512, 5TH FLOOR,

WANAPARTHY BLOCK, 121

UTHAMAR GANDHI ROAD,

NUNGAMBAKKAM

CHENNAI-600 034

2.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

TAX-CIRCLE 4(1)(1)

2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING

KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK

BANGALORE-560 095

3.

PRINCPAL COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX-4

5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING,

KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK

BANGALORE-560 095. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI DILEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX APPEAL ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:15/09/2017 PASSED IN ITA NOS.621 AND 785/MDS/2016 (ANNEXURE-G), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012 PRAYING (i) TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE (ii) TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, DATED:15/09/2017 IN ITA NOS.621 AND 785/MDS/2016 (ANNEXURE-G) TO THE EXTENT QUESTIONED HEREIN AND (iii) PASS SUCH OTHER OR SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO PASS ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Ms. Mahima Goud, learned counsel for Shri T. Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the assessee.

Shri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for Shri 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 as withdrawn with the liberty to revive the same, in case occasion so arises.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

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 →