N. Gurupadappa Saraswathi v. The Income-tax Officer Ward 8(2), Bengaluru
[Citation -2020-LL-0318-80]

Citation 2020-LL-0318-80
Appellant Name N. Gurupadappa Saraswathi
Respondent Name The Income-tax Officer Ward 8(2), Bengaluru
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 18/03/2020
Assessment Year 2004-05
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags non-prosecution
Bot Summary: A. Shankar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri M. Lava, learned Counsel for the appellant. E.I. Sanmathi, learned counsel for the respondent. Learned Counsel for appellant submits that he has no instructions to prosecute this appeal as the appellant has expired on 17.11.2015 and he is unable to trace out the legal representatives of the deceased appellant. In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to revive the same, if need arises.


1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.31 OF 2011 BETWEEN: N.GURUPADAPPA SARASWATHI NO. 322,1ST BLOCK, 5TH CROSS, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU 560032. APPELLANT (BY SRI A.SHANKAR, ADV. A/W SRI LAVA, ADV.) AND: INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(2), 3RD FLOOR, LIC BUILDING, SAMPIGE ROAD, BENGALURU 560003. RESPONDENT (BY SMT.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) 2 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED:17.01.2010 PASSED IN ITA NO.1238/BANG/2009, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004- 2005 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER OF ITAT, BENGALURU IN I.T.A.NO.1238/BANG/2009 DATED 17.09.2010 VIDE ANNEXURE A, IN INTEREST OF JUSTIVE AND EQUITY. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., MADE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Sri. A. Shankar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri M. Lava, learned Counsel for appellant. Sri. E.I. Sanmathi, learned counsel for respondent. Learned Counsel for appellant submits that he has no instructions to prosecute this appeal as appellant has expired on 17.11.2015 and he is unable to trace out legal representatives of deceased appellant. 3 2. In view of aforesaid submission, appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution with liberty to revive same, if need arises. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Cs/ N. Gurupadappa Saraswathi v. Income-tax Officer Ward 8(2), Bengaluru
Report Error