Crlrc/2431/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of Andhra Pradesh
High Court
11 Sep 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Crlrc/2431/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Date of order
11 Sep 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Crlrc/2431/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court (2024) 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
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEI\4BERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2431
Criminal Revision Case filed under Section [397('1) ][and 401 ][of ][Cr.PC against]the Order dated 28.01.2010 made [in ][Crl.t\I.P.No.3276 ][of ][2009 ][in ][C-C.No.72 ][of]2009 on the file of the court of the Special [Judge ][for ][Economic ][offences ][cum ][Vlll]Abditional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, [Hyderabad.]
Between:
The Assistant Commissioner of lncome [Tax, ][Central ][Circle, ][Aayakar ][Bhavan,]Near Kambala Tank, Rajahmundry, East [Godavari ][District.]
...Petitioner/Complainant
AND
1Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar S/o Venkata [Ranga ][Rao, ][Contractor ][R/o ] [No.]6-12-18, Main Road, Narsapur, [West Godavari ][District.]6-12-18, Main Road, Narsapur, [West Godavari ][District.]
. .. ResPondenUAccused
2The State of Andhra Pradesh,, [Represented by ][its ][Public Prosecutor, ][High]Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Vijhay [Punna, ] [for ][lncome ][Tax]
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 [: ][Sri ] [Pushyam ][Kiran]
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 [: ][Public Prosecutor]
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDERCrl.R.C No.2431 OF 2()10
ORDER:
1. . Learn ed counsel appearing for Income TaxDepartment would submit that appea_l preferred againstthe order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) havebeen dismissed by this Court insofar as the petitioner isconcerned. As such, the cause in the present RevisionCase does not survive lor adjudicatio n ald has becomeinfructuous.
2. Recordrng the said submission the Criminal RevisionCase is dismissed as infructuous.
aMiscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand
I
c1o sed
"##1f'm["Htl.-'oSECTION
//TRUE [COPY/']
To,1 The Special [Judge ][for ][Economic Offences cum ][Vlll ][Additional ][Metropolitan]' s"l.i,i* Ludge, Hyderabad - Advocate toPucl6^"cc [6 ][srivlnav ]1 The Special [Judge ][for ][Economic Offences cum ][Vlll ][Additional ][Metropolitan]' s"l.i,i* Ludge, Hyderabad - Advocate toPucl6^"cc [6 ][srivlnav ], [ijlT,;l^ilT"'li$i.iJJ"rS. On" [to ][Sri ][Ch Pushl]4. Two [CoPies]S. On" [to ][Sri ][Ch Pushl]4. Two [CoPies]
ADK/sh
>.
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 1t09t2024
ORDER
CRLRC.N0.2431 of ZOIO
i [\nt. ][s]([L_r']c?oo2 B [iiil ][282[]o-1,*Oc.' .^.,1"\, ;,-.;)'
DISMISSTNG THE CRLRC AS INFRUCTUOUS
\\ w
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.