Itta/332/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Chinta Manoj Raj
High Court
20 Aug 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/332/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Chinta Manoj Raj
Date of order
20 Aug 2013
Assessment year(s)
2004-05
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/332/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Chinta Manoj Raj, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
I.T.T.A.No.332 of 2013
Date: 20.08.2013
Between:
The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV,
Hyderabad.
.....Appellant
AND
Chinta Manoj Raj
...Respondent
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
I.T.T.A.No.332 of 2013
JUDGMENT:(per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta )
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order ofthe learned Tribunal dated 08.10.2010 in I.T.A.No.876/Hyd/10 inrelation to the assessment year 2004-05.
We have heard Sri J.V.Prasad, learned Counsel for theappellant, and gone through the judgment and order of the learnedTribunal.
The learned Tribunal has dismissed the penaltyproceedings, which was initiated as a sequel to the order of theAssessing Officer. The said order of the Assessing Officer hasbeen set aside by the learned Tribunal. Hence, there is no basisto maintain the penalty proceedings. We do not find any illegalinfirmity in the order to admit the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
___________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_______________
K.C.BHANU, J
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.