Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.630/2016
BETWEEN:
M/S.A.S.K BROTHERS LIMITED REP BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI.K.NAGARAJU #1, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. PAN : AABCA 2386D
… APPELLANT
(BY SRI.BHAIRAV KUTTAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 11 (1), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK, BENGALURU – 560 095.
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 29.07.2016 PASSED IN ETA NO.1 TO 5/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95 TO 1998-99 RESPECTIVELY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, S.SUJATHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Learned counsel for the assessee has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the appeal. The memo reads as under: 1. “The above named Appellant has filed Income Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 24 of the Expenditure Tax Act, 1987 challenging the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in ETA Nos.134, 135, 138, 133 to 137/Bang/2011 for the AYs 1994-95 to 1998-99 dated 29.07.2016. The above appeals have been admitted on 02.11.2017.
The appellant has succeeded before the Tribunal on merits of the case. However the Tribunal held against the appellant on certain legal grounds. The appellant being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal has filed this appeal before this Hon’ble Court.
We also wish to place on record that the appellant will not be able to file a cross objection in the High Court in view of the judgment of the division bench of this Hon’ble Court in Jyoti Kumari (2012) 344 ITR 60 (Kar).
Thus, in order to protect the interest of the appellant, an appeal was filed in ITA Nos.630-634 before this Hon’ble Court. However, we submit that even as on date the Revenue has not given effect to the order of the Tribunal. It is also relevant to state that the Revenue has not filed any appeal. 5. We therefore pray that these appeals may be disposed as academic and infructuous with liberty to revive in the event, for any reason on occasion arises in the future for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 6. We are extremely sorry for the inconvenience caused to the Hon’ble Court and pray that the Hon’ble Court pass such orders as it deems fit for the advancement of substantial cause of justice.”
The said memo is placed on record. In terms of the memo, the appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE