Dismissed

M/s. Indu projects Limited v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Itat)

Telangana HC13 Jul 2022WP/10240/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two petitions related to writs filed in the income tax context. The High Court noted that the relevant matter was disposed of by the ITAT earlier in the same year, concluding the petitioner would have an adequate remedy in appeal. No costs were awarded.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed without costs, and the implead petition was also dismissed without a separate order.

M/s. Indu projects Limited Vs The Income… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶5

l.A.No.2 of 2022

¶6

IN/AND WRIT PETITION NO: 10240 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. lndu Projects Limited, No.1009, lndu Fortune Fields, 13th phase, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad - 500072. Rep. by lnsolvency Professional and Member of Monitoring Committee.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

't. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 502 and 505, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080. Represented by its Assistant Registrar

¶12

1. The Honourable President, lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, 11th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-1 10003. Represented by the Registrar

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of 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, writ, order or direction, more particularly one [n the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the adjournment application filed in ITA Nos.186-189/Hyd/2018 for Assessment Years 2009 - 10 to 2012 - 13, vide letter dt. 3111212021 and also rejection of subsequent oral adjournment request on 0710112022, as illegal, unconstitutional and against the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently, direct the 2nd Respondent to dispose of the petition for Constitution of Special Bench by the 2nd Respondent-

¶15

il2il

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 20221

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the l-ligh Court^{maybe pleasedto} grant stay on all further proceedings before the 1st respondent in ITA Nos. 186189/Hyd/2018 for Assessment Years 2009 - 10 lo 2O12-13,^{including passingof} final orders, until the disposal of the^petition,71. 2811212021 filed for the constitution of Special bench by the 2nd Responderrt,^{as otherwise the petitioner} would be put to irreparable loss and severe hardship.

¶18

lA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶19

Between:

¶20

The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax-l , 6th Floor, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Opp: Botanical Gardens, Hyderabad.

¶21

...lmplead Petitioner/ Proposed Respondent No.3

¶22

AND

¶23

M/s. lndu Projects Limited, No.1009, lndu Fortune Fields,'13th phase, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad - 500072. Rep. by lnsolvency Professional and Member of Monitoring Committee.

¶24

....RespondenUPetitioner

¶25

The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), t'02 and 505, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080. Represented by its Assistant Registrar.

¶26

The Honourable President, lncome Tax Appellat,-. Tribunal, 11th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-1 10001). Represented by the Registrar.

¶27

petition under order 1, R.1o read with sectionle5T8l8:J:l?"Tffiifl:il; the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the petitioner herein as Respondent No.3.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. DUNDU MANMOHAI.I

¶29

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI B. MUKHERJEE F:OR SRI NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWARA RAO, ASSISTANIT SOLICITOR GENERAL

¶30

Counsel for the lmplead Respondent: MS. K. MAMAI'A CHOWDHARI,

¶31

SENIOR S.C. FOR INI:OME TAX DEP,ARTMENT

¶32

The Court made thc following: COMMON ORDER

¶33

¶34

! I

¶35

THE HON'BLE'I'HE CHIEF IUSTICE UIIAI- BHTJYAN AND

¶36

IHE HON'BI.E MRS. IUSI'ICE SUREPAILI NANDA

¶37

I.A.No.2 of 2022 io/ & \I'.1'.No. l0 of 2022

¶38

C_pI4.!ON.-OBDE: it,.r rlc t tan hL rt,^(./;rt ltt.,t.t I ,ri u/ .rt.t,l

¶39

llcard l\lr. l')unclu \lunrr,,lt:ur. lt:lrrrctl c()urlscl ltrr thc petiti()ner, and NIr. l3.NIukhcrjec, lcarncd c()Lrnscl rcprescnting N,[ r. Namavarapu lta,eshwara Ra(), lcarncd Assismnt Solicitor

¶40

( lcncral of India for thc responclcnrs.

¶41

\,'c havc also hcard N{s. I.,.N{arnara^(-horvdhari. lcarncd Scnior Staurlintl^(-ourrscl for lhc Inci,nrc^'l tr [)tJr:rnm('nt, \rh(⁾ has

¶42

tilcd implcarl pctiLi()n Ior thc llcr cnuc bcins [...No-2 <f 2022

¶43

'l'hc wrir pcdtion has bccn filctl sceking thc f<rllowing rclicfs:

¶44

lirr thc rcasons stated hcrcrn, thc pctitioncr pravs that this court may be pleased to issue a rvrit, ordcr or direction more particularly one in the nature o[ rvrit of mandamus, bl declaring the action of thc 1" rcspondcnt in rcjcctins thc adjournmcnt applicauon {iled in ll \ \os.lii6 llt().,/lllrl/-2(llti lirr' \sstssrtrcrtt Ytrrs l0()()-1() ro ll)12.1j, ryrlr lcrrt,r'dr..ll.ll.lttll .rrr.l ,rls,, rtlrr:rrrrrr rrl-suIr:ccluerrt oral adjournmcnt re(lue st on^(i-.(| 1 .2(122 ls illcgal. uncorrst itutiona l and against tht prir-rciplcs ol rr:rturirl -ltrsrrcc arr.l c()nscqucntl., dircct thc 2"'r ltcspondcrrt to disposc oi rht' petitiort for consutution of Spccial llcnch br thc 2"'l l(cs1;ondcnt an.l mav

¶45

ir .rrlr ofittr r,rr]e:- r)l ,rr''.1('l: .t- ril- ,:. ' rrr '-i, ilil' r' rlr I ". ( it Lrlrsrir!ri:c:r ()l thc cl:s(l

¶46

I;lom tirc zrbove, it is seer, tha'- pcljtioircl' sceks^{hltct'tcrcl1Lc} +^jrh r-t'tccttrrtr oi' iris rcqircst ftrr adirlr-rrtrlrlcnt lrt tht^{lsli,i;1.;1' 1,r1} .\PPsi111,^'lril;unal u,hilc ltcrt'trrtl I'l^...Nos. lfj(, ili'),tllrtl lttlS^t,,t thc asscsst'ncnr vca,:s 2009 ;0 ro l0l2 1.1. il ;rtltr lrt^{lrr{ !lrl(ttt!ri} tl:.tt rirt . .Ii,'rrr':IIrIcrrt r-cqll(ci ':t: lt)i'rJ( lrt iir: '-,,,,,,,,i)( r ',, l.ri.l' drtccl i I . 1,2.202i aod thcrcaftcr, o,:allv⁽⁾ⁿ 0 i.0^I .2():2

¶47

5 ( tn 06.07.2t)22, lcameci r\ssistar-rr S,olici;rir (icn.i:rl .l' intiii :iui-)r'rilli(i(l i-t iirl thc aifidavit lllt:d on lrci-,;rii^, r rcsr-r,lriLrrt" l,r. I tltili l'c!iucst of rltc 1'rt:tifion(:!' ti)r al ,:r\lliull/rlr ,,f .-rr, iirl 'l!t(l ii'ir<ir ,, tlrc lrr:ortt^'l 1y ,\lrPcllatc' Iri]-,irr ri^.,..:r. ', rrlr,.ii.iril l',, hirn ott :.1.O.1.2()22-^'l hcrciiirc, rvc h,itl rr-r:irir en^. )l)scr'\ .Ilt( )ri tlr;rl no livc issuc survives tbt adjudication. ,\ccordinslr', rht: casc hr.s bccn listcd t()dav under thc capliorr 'lrtrr di:,mi-.:ral'

¶48

(t In thc hcaring todav, N'{s. K.i,Ian-rata^{(.h,rucllr:rr,,.} ltrilnctl )'r nir,r tt iJr(lrrr\l^(-()rin:rcl fi'r tlr<, lrt<-orlc Ilr i)r'lr u'llllr'lr :ul)l)titth:rr l l .,,s.lS(r 181),rl l\r1,,'-l()1.e li,r' rlrt ,ti(::nl( llt , ( .lt . ]i^l{ )() l1)

¶49

i ,

¶50

'.1..

¶51

t(, ft)ll'l i rvcre rlispr,sccl ol' lrr rhr' lrtcontc lax .\ppcllarc 'I ribunl[, Flvderabad 'B' l]cnch, Ilvdcraba<i t,ide ordcr drrrcrl 28.02.2tr22

¶52

lf that be the position, peuooner rvould have adequatc rcmedv in the form of filing appcal under Secuon 260A of the Irrcornc'l'ax ,\ cr., 1961

¶53

ti. 'l'ht:rchrrc, wc dismiss thc \'rit l)critiorr filcd bv thc pctirioncr u itlt tht: libcrtr as abovc. No cosrs.

¶54

(,onse<iuendy, no ordcr is recluircd to bc passcd in the irnlrlcad petition being I.A.No -2 ol 2022 and the same is also clisl-xrscd of.

¶55

r\s a sctluel, miscellancous pcriri( xrs, pcncling if anv, stand

¶56

closccl.

¶57

¶58

SD/. N. RAJA GOPAL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

secrro\aorrrcen

To,

1 The Assistant Registrar, lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAI, 502 and 505, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080.

¶63

2 The Registrar, Honourable President, lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, 11th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-l^'10003.

¶64

J One CC to SRl. DUNDU MANMOHAN/Advocate [OPUC] 4 One CC to Sri Namavarapu Ra.jeshwara Rao, Assistant Solicitor General loPUCl

¶65

A One CC to Ms. K. Mamata Chowdhari, Senior S.C. for lncome Tax Department [OPUCI

¶66

6 Two CD Copies 7 One Spare Copy

¶67

CHR GJP

¶68

¶69

HIGH COURT DATED:13t0712022

COMMON ORDER

l.A.No.2 of 2022

IN/AND

W.P.No.10240 of 2022

-/a 1... -:- S T.qF €
I
2 2 liEP ?[U l:)z
Dq'

¶75

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS,

¶76

ffia
@

M/s. Indu projects Limited v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Itat)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Indu projects Limited v. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Itat)

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

Sri M. Venkat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private LtdPVT. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner (St)

M/s. Viswakirthi Conveyors Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

K. Krishna Reddy, Vs The Joint Collector

M/s. Victor Logistics Pvt, Ltd. Vs Asst. Commissioner (St)

The District Collector, hyderabad District Vs R.Dasharath Mohan Lal