Case LawHigh Court › Wp/23670/2018 Of Suresh Kumar Kothari v....

Wp/23670/2018 Of Suresh Kumar Kothari v. The Income Tax Officer

High Court 14 Sep 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Wp/23670/2018 Of Suresh Kumar Kothari v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
14 Sep 2022
Assessment year(s)
2015-16
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Wp/23670/2018 Of Suresh Kumar Kothari v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR -WRIT PETITION No.23670/2018 (TIT) BETWEEN: SURESH KUMAR KOTHARI S/O PUNAMCHAND KOTHARI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.01, OMKAR VIHAR S.B.ROAD, V.V.PURAM BANGALORE-560004. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.DILRAJ ROHIT SEQUERIA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(2)(3), BMTC COMPLEX 3 FLOOR, NO.306, KORAMANGALA 6 BLOCK, BANGALORE-560095. …RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 26.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC., THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the writ petition. 2. Memo is placed on record. Permission is granted. Writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. SD/-JUDGE NC.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan