Wp/16237/2011 Of M/S Karnataka Trade Promotion Organization v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

W.P. Nos.162 316238/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREDATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF JULY 2012BEFORE THE HON ‘BLE MR. JUSTICE H. G. RAMES WRIT PETITION Nos.1623/16238/2011 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S KARNATAKA TRADE PROMOTION ORGANIZATIONREP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTORSRI C VEERABHADRAITAHAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.121ROAD NO.5, EPIP INDUSTRIAL AREAWHITEFIELDBANGALORE 560 066 .. PETITIONER (BY SRI A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXBANGALORE 1C. R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROADBANGALORE 560001.., RESPONDENT (BY SRI M V SESHACHALA, STANDING COUNSEL) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 276AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED24.2.2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARYHEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THEFOLLOWING: ORDER H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): Tnese Writ Petitions are directed against theorder dated 24.2.2011 (Annexure-A) passed by therespondent -— Chief Commissioner of Income Tax othe two applications filed by the petitioner in FormNo.56 seeking renewal of approval under Section10(23C)(iv) of.the Income Tax Act, 1961for tneYea Ps2008-09|anc2009-10 relevant|CO 3/0assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 respectively.By the said order, the Chief Commissioner of IncomeTax has rejected tne two applications. 2 Sri A. Shankar, learned Counsel appearing forthe petitioner by relying on Circular No.7/2010 |FNo.197/21/2010-ITA-I]| dated 27.10.2010 submitthat there was no need for the petitioner to haveapplied for renewal of approval and therefore, thepetitioner may be permittedCO withdraw tne -3- aforesaid two applications and consequently, theimpugned order may be set aside. 3Sri M.V.Seshachala, learned Standing Counselappearing for the respondent rightly submits thatleave as sought for may be granted with liberty totherespondent|CO witndraw|theapproval,24accordance witn law, if such an occasion arises. 4 In view of the above, I make the followingorder: The aforesaid two applications filed before therespondentareCISMISSECaswithdrawn.Consequently, the impugned order dated 24.2.2011is set aside witn liberty to the respondent towithdraw the approval granted in accordance withlaw, when such an occasion arises. Petitions disposed of BNS/ata. Sd/-JUDGE