Dismissed

Dr. Sudhir Naik, Gowliguda, Hyderabad v. the Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1) Hyderabad

Telangana HC5 Jul 2021ITTA/287/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed an Income Tax Tribunal appeal (ITA No. 287 of 2008) as withdrawn. The appellant cited an application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 and issuance of Form 3 as grounds for withdrawal. No order as to costs was made.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty granted to revive appeal if no resolution under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

Dr. Sudhir Naik, Gowliguda, Hyderabad Vs the Income Tax… — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶7

INCOME TAX TRI BUNAL APPEAL NO: 287 OF 2008

¶8

lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad in lTA.No.102lHyd/07 for the assessment year 2000-01 dated 27.09.2007 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals-V), Hyderabad in lTA.No.05'1/lTO-5(1yC|T(A)-V/2006-07 daled 12.01.2007, preferred against the Order of the lncome Tax Officer, Ward 5 (1), Hyderabad PAN/Gl R.No.ABVPS4l 88D dated 3'1 .03.2006.

¶9

Between:

¶10

Dr. Sudhir Naik, 4-4-812, Gowliguda, Hyderabad.

¶11

...APPELLANT

¶12

AND

¶13

The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 5(1), Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

lTTA.MP.No.639 of 2008:

¶16

Petition Under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the Circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to stay all furlher proceedings pursuant to the Notice No.|TO,A/V-S(1)/1.T. Asst./'l43 (2)/2008-09, dated 21 .11.2008 issued by the lncome Tax Officer, Ward -5 (1), Hyderabad for the assessment year 2000-01. till the disposal of the above Appeal.

¶17

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A. V. KRISHNA KOUNDINYA

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI J. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX)

¶19

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶21

AND

¶22

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶23

ITTA.No.287 of 2OO8

¶24

JUDGMENT: Per Si Justice M. S. Ramachand.ra Rao)

¶25

Counsel for the appellant has addressed a letter dt.Ol.O7.2O2 1 seeking to withdraw the appeal on the ground that the appellant had made an appiication under the Direct Tax Vivaad Se Vishwas Act, 2O2O and that Form 3 was also issued by the Designated Authority.

¶26

Recording the same, this Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn grarnting liberty to the appellant to revive the appeal in the event there is no satisfactory resolution under the said Act. No order as to costs.

¶27

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶28

any, shall stand closed.

¶29

SD/.M.SANTHI VARDHANI JOINT REGISTRAR

¶30

//TRUE COPY// lt\ ,, t _/

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The lncome Tax Appellate^{Tribunal, HyderabadBench'A',Hyderabad.} 2 Thd Commissionei bf lncome^{Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad.} ) The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-S^{(1),Hyderabad.} 4 One CC to Sri A. V. Krishna^{Koundinya, Advocate} [OPUC] A One CC to Sri. J. V. Prasad^{(SC for lncome Tax)} [OPUC]

¶35

6 Two CD Copies 7 One Spare Copy o br

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0510712021

JUDGMENT

ITTA.No.287 of 2008

'i 2o,tut2o21 ? II
=*/

¶41

DISMISSING THE ITTA

¶42

AS WITHDRAWN

¶43

Dr. Sudhir Naik, Gowliguda, Hyderabad v. the Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1) Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Sudhir Naik, Gowliguda, Hyderabad v. the Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1) Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kotha Manikya Reddy Vs Sunil Ghanathe

M/s. Maheshwari Megaventures Ltd., Vs M/s. Krishnarama Industrial Investment Limited

M/s. Jain Pet / Darshan Sipani Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s. Krishnaa Cotton Mills Vs The Commercial Tax Officer, And Another

Mudigonda Gurucharan Vs All Concerned

Pulipati Dheeraj Kumar Vs All Concerned