PCIT, Mangaluru / DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO, Ward-2, Udupi v. Udupi District Tappers Co-Operative Federation Ltd - 2020-LL-0211-62

Citation	2020-LL-0211-62
Appellant Name	PCIT, Mangaluru / DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO, Ward-2, Udupi
Respondent Name	Udupi District Tappers Co-Operative Federation Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	11/02/2020
Judgment	View Judgment
Bot Summary:	The appellants are the respondents before the learned Single Judge. From paragraph 4 of the impugned order, it appears that an order of remand has been passed by the consent of the parties. By the said order, the order at Annexure-C to the writ petition, being an order under sub-section(b) Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been set aside and the matter has been remanded to the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to decide the matter in accordance with law. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that consent was given by the appellants on the 3 basis of the judgment and order dated 19th September, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge. He pointed out that against the said order of the learned Single Judge, an appeal has been preferred in which the order of the learned Single Judge has been stayed. If the appellants want to withdraw their consent on the ground of a subsequent order of stay, the appellants will have to apply to the learned Single Judge seeking permission to withdraw such a consent. No interference is called for in the appeal against the impugned order, which is passed by the consent of the parties.

1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 PRESENT HONBLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HONBLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 106 OF 2020 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, C. R. BUILDING N. G. ROAD, ATTAVARA MANGALURU-575001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE BENGALURU-560 500. 3. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN ADI-UDUPI MALPE ROAD, UDUPI-576 103. APPELLANTS (BY SHRI NEERALGI JEEVANBABU JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI E. I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/s UDUPI DISTRICT TAPPERS CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD. R. R. COMPLEX, KUNJAL ROAD BRAHMAVARA, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 213 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY IN CHARGE- MR. RAVIKARA RESPONDENT 2 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 10.12.2019 IN W. P. NO.35905/2019 PASSED BY LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel appearing for appellants. appellants are respondents before learned Single Judge. 2. From paragraph 4 of impugned order, it appears that order of remand has been passed by consent of parties. By said order, order at Annexure-C to writ petition, being order under sub-section (2)(b) Section 119 of Income Tax Act, 1961, has been set aside and matter has been remanded to Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to decide matter in accordance with law. 3. learned counsel appearing for appellants submits that consent was given by appellants on 3 basis of judgment and order dated 19th September, 2019 passed by learned Single Judge. He pointed out that against said order of learned Single Judge, appeal has been preferred in which order of learned Single Judge has been stayed. 4. If that be so, remedy of appellants is before learned Single Judge. If appellants want to withdraw their consent on ground of subsequent order of stay, appellants will have to apply to learned Single Judge seeking permission to withdraw such consent. Hence, no interference is called for in appeal against impugned order, which is passed by consent of parties. 5. Subject to what is observed above, appeal is disposed of. All pending applications do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE vgh PCIT, Mangaluru / DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru / ITO, Ward-2, Udupi v. Udupi District Tappers Co-Operative Federation Ltd

Metadata

Judgment