Crlrc/2437/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of A.p
High Court
11 Sep 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Crlrc/2437/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of A.p
Date of order
11 Sep 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Crlrc/2437/2010 Of The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar And The State Of A.p, 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
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI [JUSTICE K.SURENDER]
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: [2437 OF ][2010]
Criminal Revision Case under [Section 397(1) ][& ][401 ][of ][Cr.P.C. aggrieved by]the Order dated 28.01 .2010 made [in Crl.M.P.No. ][3270 ][of 2009 ][in ][C.C.No.64 ][of ][2009]on the file of the court of the [spl. ][Judge ][for ][Economic ][offences ][cum ][Vlll ][Addl.]Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad-
Between:
The Assistant Commissioner of lncome [Tax, ][Central Circle, ][Aayakar ][Bhavan,]Near Kambala Tank, Rajahmundry, [E.G.Dist.]
...Petitioner/Complainant
AND
't. Kotla Venkat Ram Kumar,, S/o. Venkata Ranga Rao' Aged 43 years, Occ:Contractor; R/o. H.No.6-12-18, [Main Road, ][Narsapur, ][W.G. ][District.]Contractor; R/o. H.No.6-12-18, [Main Road, ][Narsapur, ][W.G. ][District.]
...RespondenUAccused
2. The 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(s): Sri. [Vijhay ][K Punna]
Counsel for the Respondent [No.1 ]: Ch Pushyam Kiran
Counsel for the Respondents: [Public Prosecutor]
The Court made the following:
/,
THT} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K,SURENDER
Crl.R.C No.2437 oF 2010
ORDER:
i. Learned counsel appearing for Incorre TaxDepartmr:nt would submit that appeal preferred againstthe orde: of Incom e Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) havebeen disrnis sed by this Court insofar as the petitioner isconcernerf . As such, the cause in the present t{evisionCase does r-ror survive for adjudication and has becomeinfructuo us.
2 Rec,rding the said submission the criminal FrevisionCase is dismissed as infructuous.
3Misc:ellaneous Petitions, pending if arry, shalL standclosedclosed
Sd/.I.NAGA DEPUREGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SESllON
To,1. The spl. Judge [for ][Economic ][offences ][cum ][vlll ][Addl. ][Metropolitan ][sessions]Judge, Hydr:rabad. [(with records, if ][any)]1. The spl. Judge [for ][Economic ][offences ][cum ][vlll ][Addl. ][Metropolitan ][sessions]Judge, Hydr:rabad. [(with records, if ][any)]
2. One CC to [lSri. ][Vijhay K ][Punna ][Advocate ] '
3. One CC to [liri. ]Ch [Pushyam Kiran Advocate ] '
4. Twb ccs to Public [Prosecutor, ][High ][court ][for ][the State ][of ][Telangana. ][[oUT].]5. Two CD Copies.YIR/prp
CI k[[l']]
\ [[l']]
HIGH COURT
DATED:1110912024
ORDER
CRLRC.N o.',2437 of 201 0
DISMISSINCi OF THE CRL.RC.AS INFRUC'TUOUS.
V*l)- t-,-?EC
r- STAi6<J((ik]o1 B [[Et ][2$24]co,i [,r]oiis r)..17
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.