Case Law › High Court › Itta/312/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income...

Itta/312/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Hyderabad v. M/S. Hyderabad Race Club

High Court 30 Jul 2013 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · taphc

Parties

Date of order

30 Jul 2013

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itta/312/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Hyderabad v. M/S. Hyderabad Race Club, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence, we dismiss the appeal on that ground alone.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU I.T.T.A. No. 312 of 2013 DATE: 30.07.2013 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax-II,Hyderabad. … Appellant And M/s. Hyderabad Race Club,Malakpet, Hyderabad. … Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU I.T.T.A. No. 312 of 2013 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) No certified copy has been annexed to this appeal. Hence, we dismiss the appeal on that ground alone. However, liberty isgiven to the appellant to file fresh appeal with the certified copy, within aperiod of four weeks from date, failing which the issue will be a closedchapter. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ ________________K. C. BHANU, 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.