Itta v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabd

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE AT HYDERABADTVIONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [P.SAM ] ANI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL A [NO: 288 ] [2008] Appeal under Section 260 of the [lncome Tax ][Act, ][196'1 ][against ][the ][order]dated 29-06-2007 [in ][lT ][( ][S.S.) ][A.No. ][17lHyd/1996 ][( ][Block ][Period ][1986-87 ][to]1996-97) on the file of the [lncome ][Tax ][Appellate ][Tribunal' ][Bench ]["8" ]'Hyderabad. Between: [t/.Aruna UR of lM. Sridhar, [(G.l.R. ][No ][S-701) ][R/o. ][l23 ][Srinagar ][Colony,]Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND The Assistant Commissioner of [tncome ][Tax, ][lnv. 2(1). ][Hyderabad] ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant:SRI A.V.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA [for ][SRI.A.V.KRISHNA]KOUNDINYA FOR SRI P.MURALI Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. [J. ][SUNITHA, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL]FOR I.T.DEPARTMENT The Court delivered the following [Judgment] THE HONOURABLE SRI J USTICE P.SAM KOSHY ANT) THE HONOURAtsL E SRT JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO INCOMB TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No.288 of 2008 JI'DGl\lENl :,t\. !t,. r . .'. .r,.tunt,r t \rtn ^'orr, Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, lcarned counsel lcrr the appellanL, and Ms. J.Sunita, Icarned Ser-rior Standing counsel lor Irconre ['r'ax ]Depar.trnentappearing on behalf o1- the respondent. 2. l'he instant appeal has been filed by the appellant under Sectio, 2604 of the Income J'ax Act. 1961, assailing the order passed by the Incomc Taxt [.{ppcltate ][TrihLrnal. ][IIl,derabad ][Llench ]['B', ][Hi,derabad ][(1or ][short the ][,I ][I'A.I',) ]int. I.(S.S.)A.No.17l1lvdl1996 fbr the block pe.iod r986-u7 1o 1996-97, clecidcdon 19.06.2007.t [.{ppcltate ][TrihLrnal. ][IIl,derabad ][Llench ]['B', ][Hi,derabad ][(1or ][short the ][,I ][I'A.I',) ]int. I.(S.S.)A.No.17l1lvdl1996 fbr the block pe.iod r986-u7 1o 1996-97, clecidcdon 19.06.2007. 3. Though the learned counsel for the appellant tried to canvass the lact thatthc ITAT \vas r1o1 justified in accepting the contention ol Ll-re respondent thatthere cannot bc any addition with regard to the purchase ol propefty atBangalore solely or.r the ground ol the appellant having admitted theunexplained investnrent during the said block period. Howcver, perusal ol theinrpuorred order w,ould go to show that the I'lA^l'has threadbare considcrcd lhe contentions put forth by the appellant and the ITAT found that there are ceftainadmissions being made by the appellant himsellin the course of the proceedingsdrawn by the Income Tax Departurcnt 4. 'Ihus, we are of the considercd opinion that the contentions andsubmissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant do not make out [a]question of law, much less a substantial question of law calling lor aninterlerence to the impugned ordcr passcd by the ITAI'. The instaLrt appeal thusfails, and is accordingly, rejected. No costs 5As a sequel, tniscellaneous petitions pending il any, shall stand closed. SD/- I. NAGA LAKSHMIJOINT REGISTRARJOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, [Bench ]["B" ], [Hyderabad.] 1, )One CC to Sri P. Nilurali Krishna,Senior [Standing ][Councel ][for ][lT ] 5Y,tL)One CC to Sri P. Nilurali Krishna,Senior [Standing ][Councel ][for ][lT ] 5Y,tL 5Y,tLaone CC to [/ls. J. Sunitha , [qdtasale ][(OPUC)]4One CC to SRl. A V KRISHNA [KOUNDINYA, Advocate ]IOPUC]4One CC to SRl. A V KRISHNA [KOUNDINYA, Advocate ]IOPUC] 5Two C.D.Copies Kul/psl \qr HIGH COURT DATED:04/08/2025 JUDGMENTITTA.No.288 of 2008 RE.I EC]TI}i(} TI{E ITTAWTI HOUl'COS fS -^o\a[oA]c&F. ..1. \'( i-/.,,;-.\,// [-'].t.r 18 StP [2U5]*O6Jr. [:,.,]