MR H BASAVARAJA SETTY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to file an application for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and to seek restoration of the writ petition if the settlement does not materialize.
What were the facts?
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Officer and seeking to declare proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act as illegal. The petitioner later filed a memo seeking to withdraw the petition.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the legality of proceedings initiated under Section 148. However, the case was disposed of based on the petitioner's request to pursue a settlement under a different 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 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.2826/2021 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
Mr. H. Basavaraja Setty, S/o H. Pampanna Shetty, Aged about 71 years, Residing at: Varsha, Opp. Horticulture Office, HP Extention, Chitradurga.
… Petitioner
(By Sri Harish V.S., Advocate)
AND:
The Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward 1, Aayakar Bhavan, Tamatkal Road, Medehally, Chitradurga - 577 502.
… Respondent
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 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 10.12.2019, for the Assessment Year 2014-15 vide Annexure-D and consequently declare that the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act against the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2014-2015, is illegal and bad in law and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
2 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 writ petition, granting leave/liberty to the petitioner to file an application for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, and avail the benefit of the Scheme and further 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 →- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026