THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SRI. SIDDHESHWAR CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed the appellants to withdraw the appeal as it was filed in error. They were granted liberty to pursue a separate, already filed appeal concerning the same impugned order.
What were the facts?
The appellants, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer, filed an appeal before the High Court challenging an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. However, they realized the appeal was filed by mistake.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the revenue was maintainable, given it was filed by mistake and a similar appeal was already pending.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR ITA NO.100142/2015 Between: 1 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Road, Belagavi. 2 The Income Tax Officer, Nippani, Belagavi Dist. …. Appellants. (By Sri Y.V.Raviraj, Adv.) And: Sri Siddheshwar Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., A/P Borgaon, Chikkodi Tq., Belagavi Dist. …. Respondent. ---
2 This ITA is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, praying to allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji, in ITA No.14/PNJ/2015 dated 20.3.2015, etc. This ITA coming on for Orders this day, S.ABDUL NAZEER.J., delivered the following: JUDGMENT Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that by mistake, this appeal has been filed challenging the impugned order. He further submits that an appeal in ITA No.100100/2015 has already been filed by the appellants challenging the very same impugned order and in the said appeal, notice has been issued. Hence, he files a memo seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this appeal with liberty to pursue ITA No.100100/2015.
3 2. The memo is placed on record. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellants to pursue the appeal in ITA No.100100/2015. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE. Sd/- JUDGE. BMM/-
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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 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