MRS POOJA AGARWAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition as not pressed. Liberty was reserved to the petitioner to seek restoration if the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme does not materialize.
What were the facts?
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Income Tax Officer and proceedings initiated under Section 148 for Assessment Year 2012-13. The petitioner later filed a memo seeking to withdraw the matter.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the legality of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Officer. The case was disposed of due to the petitioner's intention to settle under a scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.4958/2021 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
MRS. POOJA AGARWAL, W/O VISHAL AGARWAL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.28, 4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, K.S. GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 027.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI HARISH V.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE - 7 (2) (2) 3RD FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 56 095.
… RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT DISPOSING OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER, DATED 30.12.2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 I.E., ANNEXURE-D AND CONSEQUENLTY DECLARE THAT THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW AND ETC.
2 THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner has filed a memo, which reads as follows:
"The petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to withdraw the above matter as not pressed since the petitioner is contemplating of settling the dispute by availing the benefit under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and hence it is humbly prayed to grant leave/liberty to the petitioner to file an application under the VSV Scheme reserving liberty to seek restoration of the above writ petition at an appropriate stage, in an event the settlement under the Scheme does not materialise so as to meet the ends of justice."
In light of the said memo, petition is dismissed. Liberty is reserved to initiate proceedings regarding the same cause of action, if settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme does not materialise.
In light of the memo filed, office objections are overruled.
Sd/- JUDGE
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026