Dismissed¶53

Avanti Feeds Ltd., v. Commissioner of Incometax

Telangana HC6 Jan 2026ITTA/56/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, ITTA No.56 of 2011, Avanti Feeds Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad-1; appeal under S.260-A, Income Tax Act 1961, against ITAT Hyderabad Bench 'B' order in MA No.198/HYD/2010 (in ITA No.1360/HYD/2008), AY 2001-02, dated 12-11-2010; dismissed for want of prosecution on 06-01-2026 owing to appellant's non-representation despite repeated calls; no costs; pending miscellaneous applications stood closed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; no costs awarded; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, directed to stand closed. ¶53

Avanti Feeds Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Incometax — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2026)

[^348e ]

I Ii I I t I .:

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶5

TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF^JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{P.SAM KOSHY} AND THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICESUDDALA CHALAPATHIRAO}

¶8

INCOME TAX TRIBU^{NALAPPEAL NO:56 OF 2011}

¶9

lncome tax Tribunal Appeal^{under Section260-,4 of the lncometax Act'} 1961 against the order^{of the IncomeTax AppellateTribunal, Hyderabad BenchB,} Hyderabad in MA NO^{198/HYD/2010 (in ITA No.1360/HYD/2008) for Assessment} year 2oo1-02 dated 12-11-2010, preferred against the order^{passed by the} commissioner of lncome^{Tax (Appeal-ll), Hyderabad in ITA No.0065/ClT(A)/0405,} preferred against the Assessment^{order dt 2610312004in GIR/PAN : AABCA7365E,} passed by Deputy Commissioner^{of lncome Tax Circle 1(1), Hycjerabad'}

¶10

Between:

¶11

Avanti Feeds^LTD.,, G 2, Concorde^{Apartments,6-3-658,Somajiguda,} Hyderabad.

¶12

...Appellant

¶13

AND

¶14

Commissioner Of lncome^{Tax, Hyderabad-1} ,^{lT Towers, 10-2-3,A C Guards'} Hyderabad.

¶15

...Responde nt

¶16

Counsel for the Appellant(s):^{None appeared}

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents:^{BOKARO SAPNA REDDY} (SENIOR SC INCOME TAX)

¶18

The Court made the^{following: JUDGMENT}

¶19

':.: .eli"*i -7

¶20

IJONOU IIT\Ul,!l S R I .l tiS'l'l(' E I,.SAM K() : t Y ANI)

¶21

IION'BLI.- SRI .'US ICI] SUDDAI,A CHAI,AI'' III RAO l-l TA N0.56 of 201 t

¶22

l)a 1c:{)6.i1I .202(r

¶23

Iletu'ccn:

¶24

Ar anti I cetls I id - []i d.:nrl,ati

¶25

Appellant ,\ rrii

¶26

( otnrttissiortel ol lrrior--re i lrr- Ilrile i:1,:rrl

¶27

Rcspondcnt .ltirXti\tEN'I: r l,Lt^{I lrttt .t,i. \t i .)tt.tu,r' l'.\rritt KLt:ltt t} !1s.1).Sirprrlr [{cdth. lcalrrctl \cr,ior Stltnrling ('otu.,s: Ibr Income Tax

¶28

[)cprtrtrtrcnt. apltelrrs (itr- h. rispoirtii..;rl.

¶29

l. lltcrc is no t'al)t c:,Jitiirli()n ()l i)rjlrilll- t,l'rlre appclltrr t todar'. inspitc ol lc[,eetr'(l calls. A l.crrrs;il L i tlt,.'plr',,-,:,r.r.ir_gs \ila(]i \vould sir r r thirt e.,en in thc past coUple of uccrrsions. llrL r'c is no represcnriltion on bchrril' rlthc appcllant.

¶30

-1. lrt vicu ot'litc :lrr,r.. liriq iji;rr lr is icfi rvith no cl rcr option but to disniiss tlre appcal l,rr \iLrl ()l pl-(rsu.t,lt(lit. 4. Accordinch. thc r\prtcal^.-t ,itrl,r tlisrtrissed {br u irt t ol prosecution. No costs.

¶31

l)crtding ntirtr-'llalteoirs applierrliorts. i1'anr. sIall stzlt ( ,jloscd

¶32

SD/- A. '/ S.S.C.S.M SARMA I(fINT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

;ECTION OFFICER

To,