THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. MURUGESH R NIRANI and OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the appeals had become infructuous because the assessee company had offered its undisclosed income for tax. The respondent's counsel did not dispute this submission.
What were the facts?
The appeals were filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The company, M/s. Nirani Sugars Limited, where a search was conducted, has since offered its undisclosed income for tax.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals filed by the revenue have become infructuous due to the assessee offering undisclosed income for tax.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA No.100084 OF 2015 C/W ITA Nos.100086 OF 2015 AND 100081 OF 2015 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR ITA No.100084 OF 2015 C/W ITA Nos.100086 OF 2015 AND 100081 OF 2015 IN ITA 100084 OF 2015 BETWEEN 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL ) QUEEN’S ROAD, BENGALURU 2. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, BELAGAVI ... APPELLANTS (By Sri Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND MURUGESH R NIRANI & OTHERS (AOP) NO. 916-A, BASAV NAGAR MUDHOL, BAGALKOT 587 313. ... RESPONDENT (By Sri ASHOK A. KULKARNI AND SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADVS) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET AISDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANJI BENCH, PANAJI IN ITA NO.198/PNJ/2014, DATED 08/01/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
ITA No.100084 OF 2015 C/W ITA Nos.100086 OF 2015 AND 100081 OF 2015 -2- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI. IN ITA 100086 OF 2015 BETWEEN 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL )BENGALURU 2. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, BELAGAVI ... APPELLANTS (By Sri Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND MURUGESH R NIRANI & OTHERS (AOP) NO. 916-A, BASAV NAGAR MUDHOL, BAGALKOT 587 313. ... RESPONDENT (By Sri ASHOK A KULKARNI & SRI H.R. KAMBIYAVAR, ADVS.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET AISDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANJI BENCH, PANAJI IN ITA NO.200/PNJ/2014, DATED 08/01/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI. IN ITA 100081 OF 2015 BETWEEN 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL), QUEEN’S ROAD, BENGALURU. 2. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, BELAGAVI. ... APPELLANTS (By Sri Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.)
ITA No.100084 OF 2015 C/W ITA Nos.100086 OF 2015 AND 100081 OF 2015 -3- AND MURUGESH R NIRANI & OTHERS (AOP), NO.916-A, BASAV NAGAR, MUDHOL, DT. BAGALKOT:587313, ... RESPONDENT (By Sri ASHOK. A. KULKARNI AND SRI. H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET AISDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANJI BENCH, PANAJI IN ITA NO.197/PNJ/2014, DATED 08/01/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI. THESE ITAs COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, H.G. RAMESH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): 1. Sri Ashok A. Kulkarni and Sri H.R.Kambiyavar, learned counsel submit that they will file vakalath for the respondent in ITA Nos.100084 of 2015 and 100081 of 2015 in a week’s time. They are accordingly permitted to file vakalath. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that these appeals have become infructuous as M/s. Nirani Sugars Limited, the company where search was conducted
ITA No.100084 OF 2015 C/W ITA Nos.100086 OF 2015 AND 100081 OF 2015 -4- under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has offered for tax the undisclosed income. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent do not dispute the aforesaid submission. The appeals are accordingly disposed of as having become infructuous. Appeals disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE kmv
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vandemataram Projects Private Limited vs. Raipur Development AuthorityChhattisgarh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- Mrs. Aqsa Begum vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026