COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI M NAGARAJ

PDF · subscribers
ITA/197/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC01030367201202 July 2018Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present appeal filed by the Revenue had become infructuous due to the dismissal of a related appeal. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal before the High Court against an ITAT order. The Revenue's counsel informed the court that a related appeal concerning the same assessee had been dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue has become infructuous. The court decided based on the status of a related appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Sec.260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JULY 2018

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

AND

THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

I.T.A.No.197/2012

BETWEEN

1.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU-3

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -11 (2) MYSURU. ... APPELLANTS

(By Sri. E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND

SHRI M NAGARAJ M/S NAGEETHA COMPLEX SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU ... RESPONDENT

(By Sri. S PARATHASARATHI, ADVOCATE AND JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE )

This ITA is filed Under Sec.260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 09-03-2012 passed in appeal proceedings

Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.197/2012 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri.M.Nagaraj

2/3

No.M.P No.58/Bang/2011 and ITA No.793/Bang/2005, for the Assessment Year 1999-2000, praying to:

i) formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein, ii) set aside the common appellate order passed by the ITAT, 'A' Bench, Bengaluru in appeal proceedings No.M.P No.58/Bang/2011 and ITA No.793/Bang/2005, as sought for in this appeal, in the interest of justice and equity.

This I.T.A. coming on for admission, this day, Dr. VINEET KOTHARI J. delivered the following:-

JUDGMENT

Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, Adv. for Appellants-Revenue Mr.S.Parthasarathi and Jinita Chatterjee, Advs. for Respondent-Assessee

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Revenue brings to our notice that since in pursuance of the remand order passed by the learned Tribunal, in respect of the very same assessee, in ITA No.198/2012 (DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.M.NAGRAJ) vide order dated 25th March 2018, the appeal before this Court is dismissed as withdrawn, this appeal has also become infructuous.

Date of Judgment 02-07-2018 I.T.A.No.197/2012 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri.M.Nagaraj

3/3

2.

In view of the order passed in ITA No.198/2012, dismissing the appeal as infructuous in respect of the very same assessee, we are of the opinion that the present appeal filed by the Revenue has also been rendered infructuous. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

bnv

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →