M/S. FILTREX TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/508/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01051313201809 July 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Filtrex Technologies Private Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal filed by the appellant should be allowed to be withdrawn.

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 9TH DAY OF JULY 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

I.T.A. NO.508 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

M/S. FILTREX TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED #36/4, RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR NEAR RING ROAD 4TH CROSS HRBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560043 (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. VISHWAROOP SHUKLA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O SRI. LATE M.L. SHUKLA PAN:AAACF4091P.

... APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHYTHANYA K.V. ADV.)

AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), ROOM NO.227 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FT. ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095.

... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) - - -

THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11/4/2018 PASSED IN IT(TP)A NO.469/BANG/2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED ABOVE. II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU ‘A’ BENCH, BEARING IN IT(TP)A No.469/BANG/2017 DATED 11/4/2018 & ETC.

THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Mr.Chythanya K.V., learned counsel for the appellant has appeared through video conference. Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the respondent has appeared through video conference.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw this appeal.

3.

For the reasons assigned in the memo, the appeal is permitted to be withdrawn.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

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 →