Itta/381/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S.vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd
High Court
10 Feb 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/381/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S.vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd
Date of order
10 Feb 2025
Assessment year(s)
2002-2003, 2002-033
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/381/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii v. M/S.vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd, the High Court (2025) 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
I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 381 OF 2010
Appeal filed under Section 260(4) of the lncome-Tax Act., 1961, against theorderdated 31-07.2008 [passedinlTA.No. ]1001iHydl2000fortheassessmentyear2002-2003 on the file of the Court of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal HyderabadBench ['B' ]preferred against the Order dated: 27.O3.2008 [passed ]in lTA.No. 439/DC-3(3)/C|T(A)-|V/07-OB A.Y 2002-2003 on the frle of the Court of the Commissioner oflncome Tax (Appeals)-lV, Hyderabad preferred against the Assessment Orderdated.24.12.2007 passed in PAN/GIR No on the file of the Court ofthe lncome Tax Department, Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle3(3),Hyderabad.
Between:
The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lll, lT Towers, Masabtank, Hyderabad
...APPELLANT
AND
M/s. VBC Ferro Alloys Ltd, 6-2-913/914, 3'd Floor, Progressive Towers,Khairtabad, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the.Appellants: Sri J.V. Prasad, Standing Counsel for lncome TaxCounsel for the Respondents: Challa Nagendra PrasadThe Court delivered the following JUDGMENT:
II
THE HoNOURABT,E SRI JUSTICE P.SAI\I KOSHYANDTHE HoNOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAONANDIKONDA
ITTA No.381 OF 20r0
JTJDGMENl' fiter Hon'hle Sri .Iu:stice P.Sam Koshy)
Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Junior StandingCounsel reprcsenting Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Senior StandingCounsel fbl llrc Income Tax Department for the appellant. Perusedthe record
2. This appeal undcr Section 260,4 of the Incorne l'ax Act.I 961, has l.,een prelerred by the Revenue as the appellantagainst thc order datcd 31.07.2008 passed by the Income ['I-ax]Appcllatc' Ilibunal, llyderabad Bench 'B', ]lydcrabad,IN1.1'.A.No. 100 l/tJyd/2008 firr the Assessment Year 2002-033. Central lloard ol Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issucd CircularNo.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending the previous CircularNo.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024, by further enhancing the monetarl'limits fol frling appeals by the Income Tax Departrnent before thcIncome Tax r\ppellate 1'ribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court
II
a
as a lneasure [for ][reducing ][litigation' ][In ][paragraph ][2 ][of ][the ][said]Circular. [we ][find ][that ][the ][monetary ][limit ][fixed ][for ][filing ][an ][appeal]before the [High ][Court ][is ][Rs'2'00 ][crore']
1. In the instant [appeal, ][tax ][effect is ][well ][below ][the ][monetary]lirnit.
5. Therefore, [the ][appeal ][filed ][by ][the ][Department ][is ][dismissed ][in]tems of [the ][aforesaid ][Circular ][No'9 ][of ][2024 ][dated ][17 ]['09'2024']I{owever,'it [the ][appeal comes ][within ][the ][exception ][of ][Circular]No.5 oi [2024, ][it ][would ][be ][open to the lncome ][Tax ][Departrnent to]seek revival [ofthe ][appeal' There shall be ][no ][order ][as ][to costs']
6, Consequently, [miscellaneous ][petitions ][pending' ][if ][any' ][shall]
stand closed.
Sd,. [K.][ SRINIVASA RAO]INT REGISTRAR//TRUE [COPY/']ECTION
To,1lncome [Tax,]23il: [s,:"ffi+Eii ][sfl ][:;: ][# ][:#l#flffitt ][H[{r?l:r ]["']4.5Effi itiiEii[x],:'ffi [gbl',","'r,['rJ:iJ"*#?331q]b.iwo CD [CoPies]Vtl/gh+p
IIIj
I
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1010212025
JUDGMENT
ITTA.No.381 of 2010
DISMISSING THE ITTA
B
j ,,i I[Q6o2 [til\i\ ][?[25]al*t DssP,rr
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.