Case LawHigh Court › Itta/24/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Itta/24/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax -Ii v. M/S. Ravi Shankar Real Estates

High Court 19 Jun 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/24/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax -Ii v. M/S. Ravi Shankar Real Estates
Date of order
19 Jun 2013
Assessment year(s)
1999-2000
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itta/24/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax -Ii v. M/S. Ravi Shankar Real Estates, the High Court (2013) 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 OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNETWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.24 OF 2013 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax-II,Hyderabad. ..... Appellant AND M/s. Ravi Shanker Real Estates,8-3-903/F, Nagarjuna Nagar,Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench dated14.3.2012 in relation to the assessment year 1999-2000and 2000-2001. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellantand after going through the impugned judgment, we are ofthe view that the Tribunal has not decided anything elserather set aside the order and remanded the matter forfresh hearing. We do not find any substantial question of lawinvolved in the matter. Accordingly the appeal isdismissed. No costs. _______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. June 19, 2013MAS __________ G.Rohini, J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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