Case LawHigh Court › Itta/147/2010 Of International Education...

Itta/147/2010 Of International Education Academy , Hyderabad v. Dy. Director Of Income Tax [E] Iii, Hyderabad

High Court 11 Aug 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/147/2010 Of International Education Academy , Hyderabad v. Dy. Director Of Income Tax [E] Iii, Hyderabad
Date of order
11 Aug 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itta/147/2010 Of International Education Academy , Hyderabad v. Dy. Director Of Income Tax [E] Iii, Hyderabad, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
[ [348s ][I] IN THE AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, '"rfiio iuousnuo nruo TWENTY FlvE PRESENT THE HON'BLE [JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY]ANDTHE HON'BLE PPEALNO:1[47 ][0F]2010 INCOM [ TRIBU NAL ][A] Appeal [under section ][260A ][of ][the ][lncome ][Tax ][Act' ]['1961 ][aggrieved by the]order [dated ][08-09-2008 ][in ] [No494t{ydl2O07 ][& ][518/Hyd/2008 ][for ][the]Assessment [years ][2002-03 ][& ][2004-05 ][on ][the ][file ][of the ][lncome ][Tax ][Appellate] Tribunal, [A-Bench, ][HYderabad'] Between:"= r nL"rnutionrl [Education Academy, ][Hyderabad] AND^''"Dy. Director of lncome tax [E] lll' Hyderabad ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT Counsel [for ][the Appellant: ][Ms' Sagarika ][Koneru' counsel representing]Mr. Y. [Ratnakar] Counsel [for ][the Respondent: ][Special ][Govt ][Pleader ][for ][Tax] The Court [delivered the ][following: ] THE I{ONOURABLE SRI .ruSTICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HoNouR^sr.s sRr Jusrtil s,DDALA .HALA.ATHT RAoI.T.T.A.No.147 of 2010 JUDGfUEI{L @er Hon'bte Sri.Iusrice p.Sum Koshl) Ms. Sagarika Koneru, Iearned counsel representing Mr. Y.Ratnakar, leamed counsel for the appellant, submits thatthe subject matter has since become infructuous and she does notwant to press [he appeal any further. 2' Accordingly, the Appear is dismissed as having becomeinfructuous. ['l-here ]shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallstand closed. Sd/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAOASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, A-Bench, Hyderabad2. One CC to tt/r. Y. Ratnakar, Advocate 3. Two CCs kr GP FOR TAX,High Court for theState of Telangana atHyderabad 4. Two CD Copies Kam,?SL W HIGH COURT DATED:1 1108t2025 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.147 of 2010 THE APPEAL IS DISMISSEDAS INFRUCTUOUS ni'u[q,] .lr-,..,( \.i-?'i^/ir'i';.II![j ][1$ ] [21125](l?,')tt11--.-. ..-.,;O (
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan