Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2[1], Hyderabad v. Krishna Koundinya
High Court
11 Feb 2021 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2[1], Hyderabad v. Krishna Koundinya
Date of order
11 Feb 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2[1], Hyderabad v. Krishna Koundinya, the High Court (2021) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAOANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 228 OF 2012
lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ['A']Hyderabad in l.T.(SS)A.No.123lHydl2004, forAssessment Year 1990-91 to 1999-2000,dated 31.08.2009.
Between:
Sri lVukesh Kumar Jain LR of, Smt Vijaya Jain ldiedl, 14-2-33215, Chode Ke Khabar,Gyanbagh Colony, Hyderabad.
.,.APPELLANT
AND
Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2[1], Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Appellant: SRI. A. V. KRISHNA KOUNDINYA
Counsel for the Respondent: SRl. B. NARASIMHA SARMA,
SC FOR INCOME TAX
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
I.T.T.A. NO.228 0F 20t2
JUDGMENT:(Per 9iJustice ltl S. Ranachandra Rao)
Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant had
made an Application to the Central Board of Direct Taxes under theDirect Tax Vivad se Vishrvas Act. 2020 and therefbre he wishes toDirect Tax Vivad se Vishrvas Act. 2020 and therefbre he wishes towithdrarv this Appeal.
2. Havir-rg regard to the said sr,rbmission of the learnecl Counsel tbrthe appellant, the Appeal is permitted to be rvithdrawr and it isaccordingly dismissed as withdrawn. However, in the event there is noresolution of the dispute under the said Act, the Appellant is permitted torevive the Appeal.
3. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Appeal shall alsostand dismissed. No costs.
SD/. B.S. CHIRANJEEVIJOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad [,A, ]Bench, Hyderabad.The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad [,A, ]Bench, Hyderabad.
2. One CC to Sri. A. V. Krishna Koundinya, Advocate IOPUC]IOPUC]
3. One CC to Sri. B. Narasimha Sarma, (SC for Income Tax) [OpUC]
4. Two CD Copies
gbr.$.ly2\.L
2\.L
I
HIGH COURT
DATED:1110212021
JUDGMENTITTA.No.228 of 2012
ITTA DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN
WITHOUT COSTS
t1jcz0 9MAH [2ll2t]\r;*\..o.\
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.