DINSHAW CAWASJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/11943/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01023941201524 March 2015Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. The Court granted the permission and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The petitioner filed writ petitions challenging notices issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The petitioner sought to quash these notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the challenge to the notices issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition to pursue the grievance before the CIT (Appeals) and CIT (Admn.).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 226(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2015

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

W. P NO.11943/2015 AND W.P.NOS.12137-12138/2015 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

DINSHAW CAWASJI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS NO.16, ALEXANDRA STREET BENGALURU-560 025.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI SHANKAR A AND SRI M. LAVA ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE-1(1)

OFFICE OF THE

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX, 6TH FLOOR,

HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR

BENGALURU-560 032.

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1

6TH FLOOR, HMT BHAVAN

BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR

BENGALURU-560 032. ....RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, STANDING PANEL COUNSEL)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE VIDE ANN-A1, A2 AND A3 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 226(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT BY THE R-1 TO THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC BANK, RICHMOND ROAD, BENGALURU-560 027 DATED 12.03.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A1 AND ETC.,

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Heard Sri A Shankar, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned panel counsel appearing for respondent.

2.

Sri A Shankar, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner after arguing the matter for considerable length of time, seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this writ petition and pursue his grievance before CIT (Appeals) and CIT (Admn.).

Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Petitioner is at liberty to pursue his grievance before appropriate forum for appropriate relief. All contentions of the parties are left open.

Sd/- JUDGE

*sp

More judgments on Section 226(3)

All 95 judgments and leading authorities on Section 226(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →