KAMADHENU VIVID UDHESHAGALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/112490/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC02002862201903 February 2020Bench: S G PANDIT3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The petitioner's counsel sought to withdraw the writ petition. The court allowed the withdrawal with liberty to challenge the assessment order passed during the pendency of the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, challenged a notice issued by the Income Tax Officer. They sought a declaration that the term "co-operative" in the IT Act applies to their society.

What were the issues?

Whether the definition of 'co-operative' in the Income Tax Act encompasses societies registered under state co-operative laws like the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(19)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NO.112490/2019 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

KAMADHENU VIVID UDHESHAGALA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITH, SIDDESHWAR ROAD, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI.ISHWAR S/O RAMU MUJAGONI, AGED: 45 YEARS.

... PETITIONER (BY SRI. H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADV. FOR SMT. PATRI SHASHIKALA K, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, GOKAK, DR.GHODIGERIS HOSPITAL BUILDING, BELAGAVI ROAD, GOKAK-591307.

2.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GOKAK, DR.GHODIGERIS HOSPITAL BUILDING, BELAGAVI ROAD, GOKAK-591307.

3.

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001, REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON.

4.

MINISTRY OF FINANCE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001, REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

2 5. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, ROOM NO.610, 3RD GATE, 6TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

6.

REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, NEAR RAJ BHAVAN, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560052, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV. FOR R1 TO R4) (SMT. VEENA HEGDE, AGA FOR R5 AND R6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE WORD "CO-OPERATIVE" IN SECTION 2(19) OF THE IT ACT APPLIES TO ALL IDENTITIES REGISTERED UNDER THE STATE LAW INCLUDING A CO-OPERATIVE AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2(e) OF THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997 BY HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION OF BOTH THE ENACTMENTS AND CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2019-20/ 1017015839(1) DATED 26.07.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-"D" WAS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

3 ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge the assessment order passed during the pendency of the writ petition.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought above.

Sd/- JUDGE JTR

More judgments on Section 2(19)

All 318 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(19) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →