Itta/327/2018 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. M/S. Paras Collins Distilleries

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAN GANAAT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARAYANAINCOMETAXTRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 327 oF 2018 lncome Tax Tribunar Appeal Under section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961arising out of the order of the rncome{ax Apperate Tribunar, Hyderabad Bench , B ,arising out of the order of the rncome{ax Apperate Tribunar, Hyderabad Bench , B ,Hyderabad, in rrA No.391/Hydt2o13, for assessment year 2006_07 dated 1i_1 1_2016 preferred against the order of the commissioner of rncome Tax (Appears)-rv,2016 preferred against the order of the commissioner of rncome Tax (Appears)-rv,Hyderabad, Appeat No.34ltro 6 (3yclr (A)-tv/2o11-12 dated:1i_01_2013, preferredagainst the Order of the tncome Tax Officer, Ward _ 6(3), Hyderabad, pAN/GlRNo. /p-366 dated 31_12_08.dated:1i_01_2013, preferredagainst the Order of the tncome Tax Officer, Ward _ 6(3), Hyderabad, pAN/GlRNo. /p-366 dated 31_12_08. Between: The Pr. Commissioner of lncome Tax_4, Hyderabad ...Appellant AND M/s. Paras Collins Distilleries, Valley View, Road No..l2, Banjara Hills,HyderabadHyderabad ... Respondent Counset for the Appelllant: SRt J.V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) Counsel forthe Respondent: None AppearedThe Court delivered the foilowing: JUDGMENTThe Court delivered the foilowing: JUDGMENT \ \ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICD P.SAM KOSI{Y AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE A. LAXMI NARAYANA LT.T.A. No.327 of 20LA J!I_D._G!4ENI. r,,., it,,t i:i, .rAxr riosrry/ The present appcal urici(,r Scctio n 260A o[ tite Income taxAct. 196 1 , challenge s ro lh(. order of Income Tax Appellate'l'riburral. Hvderabad Bench .B,, ll-,i.4..rbud ([or short. ,theTribunal') in I.T A No..l9 I ll.\dl2Ol 3. clecicled on I t.l 1.2016. 2. Vide Lhe sairl inrpugnccl order, the Tribunat has allou,edtht. 3pps^1 of tlrc ersr;csst_-c nncl at the samc time had dismissedthe appeal fited by lhe Rer,<,nuc. 3. Upon going I lrrolrgh tlre impr_rgneci orcler and alsoconsidering thc subrrrissrons put lor.rh b-v Lhc learned counsel forthe Revenue, we are of tlrc considered opinion that theimpugned order is a u,r:ll rcasoned speaking order, dealing lt,ithall the grounds and contenLions raised by the appellant in theprescnl appeal as weU. 4. As such, ',r,e do not find any substantial qucsl.ion of lawmade out calllng for.;,rn inter.fcrcrlcc \\.ith the irnpug;rlcl order I ffi I,\ No order [as to] 5The zrppcal [ltrils ][ar-rcl ][is ][accordingly rcjected]CoS tS. 6. Consequentl,r', [miscellaneous ][petitions ][pending' ][if ][an1 ]['] shall star-rd [closed] Sd/.M.VIJAYA BHASKARJOINT REGISTRAR\.\,'"ir iJ rlLSECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The lncome-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'B [' ]Hyderabad2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad. 3. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 6(3), Hyderabad.4. One CC to SRI J,V. PRASAD, SC FOR INCOME TAX 5. Two CD Copies kam Ecr.C^. I \ HIGH COURT DATED:0210812023 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.327 of 2018 THE APPEAL ISREJECTED {Ac^,"l\{* 9 [SrArt]aa::11$[firit]