Partly allowed

Mr. Y. Ravichand v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 2 Others

Telangana HC17 Mar 2021WP/15790/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana considered a writ petition challenging ex-parte tax orders and a prayer to stay recovery proceedings. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to withdraw the petition and subsequently dismissed it as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move the appropriate forum was granted prior to dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn.

Mr. Y. Ravichand Vs The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 2… — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶6

THE HoN,BLE snI .,IflPrce T. VINoD KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 15790 OF 2020

¶8

Between:

¶9

.^{IVr. Y. Ravichand, Plot. No.417A,Road No. 18, JubileeHills,Hyderabad-5!0033} ...PETITIONER AND ,

¶10

¶11

.r The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Represented I by its Assistant Registrar 502 . and 505, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080

¶12

Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary(Legal Affairs), Ministry of Law and ' Justice, Central Secretariat, South Block, New Delhi- 1 . 3. The Wealth Tax Officer, Ward 14(1), 6th Floor, C Block, lT Towers, Masab Tank, HYderabad

¶13

...RESP.NDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 o'f the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more^particularly one in the nature of Writ Of Certiorarified l,4andamus, quashing the impugned ex-parte order^passed by the 1st respondent in WTA.Nos. 01 to 05/Hyd/2016 dt. 2111012016 for the Assessment Years 2004-05 to 2008-09, without^providing a valid oppodunity to^petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of lndia and direct^{the first} respondent to consider the appeal on merits and dispose of the^{same as} expeditiously as possible, after^providing a reasonable opportunity of being^heard

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{High Court may be pleased to direct} the 3rd Respondent to keep the recovery^{proceedings in abeyance, arising out of the} orders dt. 2911212011 in PAN/GIR no. AAOPY6329G^{for the A.Y.s 2004-05 to 2008-} 09 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth tax,^{Central Circle7,} Hyderabad(then AO), as otherwise the^petitioner would be^put to irreparable^lossand injury.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN

¶18

Counsel for Respondents: SRI N. RAJESHWAR RAO

¶19

ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI .IUSTICE M,S.IIAN,IACHANDRA RAO

¶22

A\D

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶24

wRlT t,t._ t't'I'to\ \o. 15790 o1'2020

¶25

ORDER: (Per l{on'ble Sri JLrsrice \1.S. I{anrachandra Rao)

¶26

Leamed counsel fbr petitioner seeks to withdraw this Writ

¶27

Petition with liberty to move tl.re appropriate Forum.

¶28

Granting liberty as sought, this Writ petition is dismissed as

¶29

withdrawn. No costs.

¶30

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶31

closed.

¶32

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// h-tSECTION OFFICER To, 1. One UU to Sri Dundu [V]anmohan Advocate IOPUCI 2. One CC to Sri Namavarapu Rajeswara Rao, Assistant Solicitor General (OPUC) J, Two CD Copies IVBC

)

HIGH COURT

;l li ii I

DATED t'1710312021

Ji(, 31t4AR 2021 1
+

ORDER

WP.No.15790 of 2020

.t I

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION}

¶42

WITHOUT COSTS

¶43

r'l
Zfit.f v ,7"-)o

Mr. Y. Ravichand v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Y. Ravichand v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Pingle Vasudeva Reddy Vs Chikkala Chowdarayya

Sri Gavva Amarender Reddy Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Sahjanand Singh Vs The State of Telangana and Another