Itta/23/2021 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao
High Court
09 Oct 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/23/2021 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao
Date of order
09 Oct 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itta/23/2021 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
oF TELANGANArN rHE [HrGH ]"or*IfSIrtJ*=otJ#E
MONDAY, 'ffio riousnND AND TwENTYTHREE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE [JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY]
AND
THE HON'BLE INCOME [ L Nos: ][2][1&23][ ot ][2O2'l]
l.T.T.A. No.21[ot ][2021]
lncome [Tax ][Tribunal ][Appeal Under ][Section 260,4 ][of the ][lncome ][Tax ][Act']against [the ][order ][of the ][lncome ][Tax ][Appellate ][Tribunal' ][Hyderabad ][Bench ]['A"]Hyderabad [in ] [No.135B ][t{ydt2O19' ][for ][assessmenlYear ][2011-12 ][dated ][19-1 1-]2019 [preferred against ][the ][Order of ][the ][Commissioner ][of ][lncome ][Tax ][(Appeals)-12']Hyderabad, [Appeal ][No"10307t2017-18 ][daled ][26-07-2019' ][preferred against ][the]OrOer of [rhe ][Deputy Commissioner ][of ][lncome-tax ][Central Circle ][-3' ][Hyderabad']PAN/GIR [No ][ dated 31-03-2013']
Between:
E::f; s3#;,Til1i,,1,".131f [lr',io'330"-"'(centrar)'7'[h]
Floor, AaYakar [Bhavan']
...Appellant
AND
1 2eA' [Road ] [o ][36' ] [ubiree]iii,I ise#:;l#t [&1: tE^\:,fr3;3R136#i ]
...Respondent
Counsel [for the Appellant: ] [K' ][MAMATA' ] [lT ] Counsel [forthe ][Respondent: ][M/s' ]
|.T.T.A.No.23 ol 2021
lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate [Tribunal, ][Hyderabad ][Bench ]['A',]Hyderabad in ITA No.1358lHydl2019, for assessment [Year ][2009-10 ][dated ][19-1 ][1-]2019 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax [(Appeals)-12,]Hyderabad, Appeal No. 1030312017-18 daled 26-07-2019, [preferred ]against theOrder of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax Central Circle -3, Hyderabad,PAN/GlR No. AAVPNBS0OE dated 31-03-2013.
Between:
Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax (Central), 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad -500 004.
...Appellant
AND
Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao, H No. 8-2-2931821A11129A, Road No. 36, JubileeHills, Hyderabad-s0O 033. [PAN: ]
...Respondent
Counsel for the Appellant: SRI K. MAMATA, SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT
Counsel for the Respondent: M/s. MN ADVOCATESThe Court made the following: COMMON ORDER
\.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHYANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICD LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTYI.T.T.A.Nos.2l &23 of 202L
COMMON ORDER:(per uon'bte Sa,tustice [p:sAM ]KoSHy)
Heard Ms. K. Mamata, learned Senior Standing Counsel forIncome Tax appearing. for the appellant and perused the record.2. These appeals have been hled assailing the order dated19.11.2O19 passed in I.T.A.Nos.1356 & 1358/Hydl2Ot9 for theAssessment Years 20O9-1O & 2011-12 on the frle of the learnedIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A,, Hyderabad(hereinafter referred to as 'the TribunalJ pending consideration ofthe appeal before this Court.
3. The Assessing Ofhcer has in fact passed consequentialorders on 3I.O5.2O21. It has also been brought to the notice ofthis Court that the said order is under further chailenge by theAssessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeal].
4. In view of the developments that have been transpired inbetween, learned counsel for the appellant at this juncture praysthat the question of law raised in the appeals be left open to beconsidered in an appropriate case.
5. Given the said submissior-rs, both the appeals staldsdisposed of as not pressed. However, the question of iaw raised in
). il.,rri r. ,':]
2
PSK.J & LNAJI T.T.A.No.21 e$ 23 of 2O2l
1S left open to left open to open to to be considered and decided in an
the appeals1S left open to left open to open to to appropriate case. There shall be no order as to costs
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall standclosed.closed.
Sd/- M. VIJAYA JOINT REGISTRARc?I),.-
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER'
To,
1. The lncome [Tax ][Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ]['8" ][Hyderabad]
2. The Commissioner [of lncome ][Tax ][(Appeals)-12' Hyderabad']
5. Given the said submissior-rs, both the appeals staldsdisposed of as not pressed. However, the question of iaw raised in
). il.,rri r. ,':]
2
PSK.J & LNAJI T.T.A.No.21 e$ 23 of 2O2l
1S left open to left open to open to to be considered and decided in an
the appeals1S left open to left open to open to to appropriate case. There shall be no order as to costs
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall standclosed.closed.
Sd/- M. VIJAYA JOINT REGISTRARc?I),.-
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER'
To,
1. The lncome [Tax ][Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ]['8" ][Hyderabad]
2. The Commissioner [of lncome ][Tax ][(Appeals)-12' Hyderabad']
3. The Deputy [Commissioner ][of ][lncome-tax Central ][Circle ][-3' ][Hyderabad]
4. One CC to [K. ][MAMATA, ] [for lT DEPARTMENT ]
5. One CC to [M/s. ][I\4N ][ADVOCATES, ][Advocates ][ ]
6. Two CD [CoPies]\\
kam [\A'.]
VII
..7-
l
HIGH COURT
DATED:0911012023
COMMON ORDER
lTTA.No.21 & 23 o12021
DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS
STATEIclNu\ [1t8]o2jtt cEsPnI
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.