Dismissed

M/S Unicorn Agro Tech Limited, Secunderabad. v. the Asst. Commisisoner of Income Tax, Hyderabad.

Telangana HC16 Mar 2021ITTA/48/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed an income-tax appeal filed by M/s Unicorn Agro Tech Limited under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it withdrew when the appellant proposed approaching the respondents under the Direct Taxes (Vivad Se Vishwas) Act, 2020.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to approach the Court if no resolution under the Direct Taxes (Vivad Se Vishwas) Act, 2020; no costs.

M/S Unicorn Agro Tech Limited, Secunderabad. Vs the Asst… — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF^IMARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE M.S.RAMACHANDRA^RAO AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{T.VINOD KUMAR}

¶7

l.T T.A. N i4 F 2009

¶8

lncome Tax Tribunal^{Appeal under Section 260-A of the lncomeTax Act,1961,} against the order of the^{lncome Tax AppellateTribunal, Hyderabad Bench'A',} Hyderabad in ITA No.93/Hyd/2007^{for Assessment Year 2003-2004 dated 30/01/2009.}

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s uNlcoRN^{AGRO TECH LIMITED,A PrivateLimited company,, havingits} ,"o-i.t6i"J oni.e^{at plot No:, UnicJrn House,Balaji Enclave, Near Gunrock,Dlamond} F"i'"t iirii.i6,i' noio,--^{xb*hana, Secunderatjad-S0O0ge,Rep.by its Director'} rrlri.iilestr Sahghani,^{S/.o Sri B.C.Sanghani aged52 years} ...APPELLANT

¶11

...APPELLANT

¶12

AND

¶13

The Asst. Commissioner^{of lncome Tax, Circle 3 [3], Hyderabad}

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

For the Appellant^{: SRI S.RAVI,Advocate}

¶16

For the Respondent^{: SRI B.NARASIMHA SARMA'} SC FOR INCOME^{TAX DEPARTMENT}

¶17

The Court made^{the following: JUDGMENT}

¶18

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEM'S'RAMACHANDRARAO}

¶19

AND

¶20

THE^{HONOURABLBSRt JUSTICE T' VINOD KUMAR}

¶21

LT.T.A.No.48^{of 2009}

¶22

JUDGMENT^{: (Per Hon'bleSri JusticeM S' RarnachandraRao)}

¶23

Leamed^{counselforaPPellant seeksto withdt'awthis Appeal to} approach^{the respondents under the DirectTaxes(Vivad Se Vishwas)} Act, 2020.

¶24

Having^{regardto the said subrnission' this appealis dismissed} as withdrawn,^{with liberty to approach this Courtin the event thereis} rvith^{the DePaftmet'It} no resoltttion^{of the dispute of the petitioner} under^{the said Act' No costs'}

¶25

As a sequel,^{miscellaneouspetitions pending'if any' shall stand}

¶26

closed.

¶27

Sd/.B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE^COPY' Cj"

¶28

SECTION^OFFICER

¶29

To 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad A' Bench' Hyderabad' 2 The Assistant^{Commissio"n;;;ii;;;6j'x'} circle-3(3)'^Hvderabad' a o;;'cC i;Sri^{S.Ravi, Advocate(oP-u^c)} 4. one cc^{to sri e.l.larastmhi-sriri,i,sc tor lncome Tax Department (9PUC)} 5. Two CD^CoPies Kj V

¶30

HIGH^COURT

¶31

DATED:16/0312021

¶32

.t9
<br>I $e -rA 16:
^.?
a(
2
t)o 1 2 APH 2021 ro
't
)ti
PAi
k*

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

ITTA.No.48 of²⁰⁰⁹

¶35

ITTA DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN^{NO COSTS.}

¶36

M/S Unicorn Agro Tech Limited, Secunderabad. v. the Asst. Commisisoner of Income Tax, Hyderabad.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Unicorn Agro Tech Limited, Secunderabad. v. the Asst. Commisisoner of Income Tax, 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

M/s Krishna Enterprises (Amba 70MM) Vs Union of India and 4 Others

M/s Sai Jeetesh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aniket Sheth and Another

Syed Luqman Abbas Razvi Vs The Central Board of Direct Taxes Government of India and 10 others

Syed Dawood Kaif Vs The State of Telangana

Colonial Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Narayanam Nageswar Rao

Cheruku Swamy Nathan Vs Venisetty Rathnam and 5 others