Wp/105216/2021 Of Bhurat Sunilkumar (Huf) v. Income Tax Officer W-1(1)

Digitally signed byTHEJASKUMAR NLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23 DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI -WRIT PETITION NO. 105216 OF 2021 (TRES) BETWEEN: 1. BHURAT SUNILKUMAR (HUF) PAN: B-268/W-2(2) (AACHBO752Q) THROUGH COPARCENER SRI. NIMIT S/O BHURAT SUNILKUMAR, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, PAN: B-268/W-2(2) (AACHBO752Q) THROUGH COPARCENER SRI. NIMIT S/O BHURAT SUNILKUMAR, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, 2. BHURAT ANILKUMAR (HUF), THROUGH COPARCENER THROUGH COPARCENER PAN: B-268/W-2(2) ( ) SRI. JAYSHEEL S/O BHURAT ANILKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, PRESENT ADDRESS FOR 1 AND 2: SHANTI NIWAS, BHURAT BUILDING, SHETTAR ONI, HIREPETH, HUBBALLI-580 028. AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, PRESENT ADDRESS FOR 1 AND 2: SHANTI NIWAS, BHURAT BUILDING, SHETTAR ONI, HIREPETH, HUBBALLI-580 028. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.MANOJ KUMAR PUKALE., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER W-1(1), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, FF. INCOME TAX OFFICE, NAVANAGAR, P.B. ROAD, HUBBALLI-580 025. CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, FF. INCOME TAX OFFICE, NAVANAGAR, P.B. ROAD, HUBBALLI-580 025. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER W-2(2) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NAVANAGAR, P.B.ROAD, HUBBALLI-580 025. CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NAVANAGAR, P.B.ROAD, HUBBALLI-580 025. 3. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, POST BAG NO.1 ELECTRONIC CITY POST OFFICE, BENGALURU-560 100. PROCESSING CENTRE, POST BAG NO.1 ELECTRONIC CITY POST OFFICE, BENGALURU-560 100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.V.RAVIRAJ AND SRI. M.THIRUMALESH., ADVOCATES) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Manoj Kumar Pukale., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.M.Thirumalesh., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Y.V.Raviraj., for the respondents have appeared through video conferencing. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Writ Petition may be dismissed as having become infructuous. When queried, learned counsel Sri.Manoj Kumar Pukale., submits that a conscious submission is made about infructuous of the Writ Petition. The oral submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners is placed on record. NC: 2024:KHC-D:12091 WP No. 105216 of 2021 The Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 49