By Sri H R Kambiyavar, Sri Aravind v. Chavan & Sri Vinod Kumar Naidu K.v., Advs
High Court
16 Sep 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karhcdharwad
Parties
By Sri H R Kambiyavar, Sri Aravind v. Chavan & Sri Vinod Kumar Naidu K.v., Advs
Date of order
16 Sep 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In By Sri H R Kambiyavar, Sri Aravind v. Chavan & Sri Vinod Kumar Naidu K.v., Advs, the High Court (2019) allowed the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
W. P. No.101726/2015 C/WW.P.Nos.101725/2015, 101727/2015 & -W.P.No.101728/2015 (TIT)
BETWEEN
IN W.P. NO.101726 OF 2015
M/S.ASSOCIATED MINING COMPANY, NO.18/35, SECOND LINK ROAD, PARVATHI NAGAR, BELLARY-583101, REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI.GALI JANARDHANA REDDY (PERIOD 31.07.2009 TO 01.04.2011)
..... PETITIONER
(BY SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, SRI ARAVIND V. CHAVAN & SRI VINOD KUMAR NAIDU K.V., ADVS.)
IN W.P. NO.101725 OF 2015
M/S.ASSOCIATED MINING COMPANY, NO.18/35, SECOND LINK ROAD, PARVATHI NAGAR, BELLARY-583101, REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI.GALI JANARDHANA REDDY
(PERIOD 31.07.2009 TO 01.04.2011)
..... PETITIONER
(BY SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, SRI ARAVIND V. CHAVAN & SRI VINOD KUMAR NAIDU K.V., ADVS.)
IN W.P. NO.101727 OF 2015
M/S.ASSOCIATED MINING COMPANY, NO.18/35, SECOND LINK ROAD, PARVATHI NAGAR, BELLARY-583101, REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI.GALI JANARDHANA REDDY (PERIOD 31.07.2009 TO 01.04.2011)
..... PETITIONER
(BY SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, SRI ARAVIND V. CHAVAN & SMT. PATRI SHASHIKALA K., ADVS.)
IN W.P. NO.101728 OF 2015
M/S.ASSOCIATED MINING COMPANY, NO.18/35, SECOND LINK ROAD, PARVATHI NAGAR, BELLARY-583101, REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI.GALI JANARDHANA REDDY (PERIOD 31.07.2009 TO 01.04.2011)
..... PETITIONER
(BY SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, SRI ARAVIND V. CHAVAN & SMT. PATRI SHASHIKALA K., ADVS.)
AND
1.DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,
BANGALURU-5600001.
2.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION, INVESTIGATION,
C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001.
3.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001. INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001.
4.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001. CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001.
5.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, STAFF ROAD, FORT, BELLARY-583102. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, STAFF ROAD, FORT, BELLARY-583102.
6.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VI, INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VI,
C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALURU-5600001.
..... COMMON RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.)
WRIT PETITION No.101726 OF 2015 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2013 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-S AND ORDER DATED 25.08.2014, ITA. NO.188/DCIT,CC-1(3)/CIT(A) -VI/B'LORE/2013-14 PASSED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-W AND DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE OBJECTIONS DATED 15.03.2013 PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-M REGARDING ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION TO HIS SUPERIOR AS PER SECTION 124(4) OF THE ACT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IN THE STATUTORY APPEAL.
WRIT PETITION No.101725/2015 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHI THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2013 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-S AND ORDER DATED 25.08.2014, ITA. NO. 187/DCIT, CC-1(3)/CIT(A) -VI/B'LORE/2013-14 PASSED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-W AND TO DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE OBJECTIONS DATED 15.03.2013 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-M REGARDING ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION TO HIS SUPERIOR AS PER SECTION 124(4) OF THE ACT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IN THE STATUTORY APPEAL.
WRIT PETITION No.101725/2015 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHI THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2013 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-S AND ORDER DATED 25.08.2014, ITA. NO. 187/DCIT, CC-1(3)/CIT(A) -VI/B'LORE/2013-14 PASSED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-W AND TO DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE OBJECTIONS DATED 15.03.2013 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-M REGARDING ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION TO HIS SUPERIOR AS PER SECTION 124(4) OF THE ACT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IN THE STATUTORY APPEAL.
WRIT PETITION NO 101727/2015 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2013 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXUER-S AND ORDER DATED 25.08.2014, PASSED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-W AND TO DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE OBJECTIONS DATED 15.03.2013 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-M REGARDING ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION TO HIS SUPERIOR AS PER SECTION 124(4) OF THE ACT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IN THE STATUTORY APPEAL.
WRIT PETITION No.101728/2015 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2013 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXUER-S AND ORDER DATED 25.08.2014, PASSED BY
THE SIXTH RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-W AND TO DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE OBJECTIONS DATED 15.03.2013 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-M REGARDING ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION TO HIS SUPERIOR AS PER SECTION 124(4) OF THE ACT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE IN THE STATUTORY APPEAL.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The counsel for the respondents has filed a memo
which reads as follows:
“1. These Writ Petitions are filed by the Petitioner seeking quashing of:
i)The order of Assessment passed by the Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-S and th order passed by the First Appellant Authority the 6[th] Respondent as per Annexure-@ for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11; Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-S and th order passed by the First Appellant Authority the 6[th] Respondent as per Annexure-@ for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11;
ii)Issue writ of mandamus to consider the objections filed before the Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-M. objections filed before the Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-M.
2.It is submitted before this Hon’ble High Court that the statutory appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order of the First Appellate Authority the 6[th]Respondent as per Annexure-W for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11 having taken up before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, came to be allowed by the Tribunal in ITA No.1356-1360/B/2014 dated 18.10.2016. the statutory appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order of the First Appellate Authority the 6[th]Respondent as per Annexure-W for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11 having taken up before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, came to be allowed by the Tribunal in ITA No.1356-1360/B/2014 dated 18.10.2016.
2.It is submitted before this Hon’ble High Court that the statutory appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order of the First Appellate Authority the 6[th]Respondent as per Annexure-W for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11 having taken up before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, came to be allowed by the Tribunal in ITA No.1356-1360/B/2014 dated 18.10.2016. the statutory appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order of the First Appellate Authority the 6[th]Respondent as per Annexure-W for the Ass Years 2007-08 to 2010-11 having taken up before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, came to be allowed by the Tribunal in ITA No.1356-1360/B/2014 dated 18.10.2016.
3.The above order of the Tribunal came to be challenged by the 3[rd] Respondent before this Hon’ble Court by way of Income Tax appeal u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 in ITA Nos.100014 to 100019 of 2017 and this Hon’ble Court by its order dated 22/07/2019 has allowed the appeals filed their by upholding the order of Assessment passed by the Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-S and the order passed by the First Appellate Authority the 6[th] Respondent as per Annexure-W. challenged by the 3[rd] Respondent before this Hon’ble Court by way of Income Tax appeal u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 in ITA Nos.100014 to 100019 of 2017 and this Hon’ble Court by its order dated 22/07/2019 has allowed the appeals filed their by upholding the order of Assessment passed by the Assessing Authority, the 3[rd] Respondent as per Annexure-S and the order passed by the First Appellate Authority the 6[th] Respondent as per Annexure-W.
Hence it is submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the above writ petitions may be dismissed as infructuous.”
2.It is submitted that the petitions were filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus to consider the
objections filed by the respondent No.3 in connection
with the assessment proceedings. It is submitted that the first and second appeals filed by the assessee and the appeals before this Court by the revenue have been disposed of.
3.In light of the same, the relief sought for does not survive for consideration.
4.Counsel for the petitioner is present and states that the proceedings have been rendered infructuous.
5.In view of the same, petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. Contentions of the parties are kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.