Case LawHigh Court › Itta/38/2009 Of Avanti Feeds Ltd v. Dy.c...

Itta/38/2009 Of Avanti Feeds Ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 07 Jan 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/38/2009 Of Avanti Feeds Ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
07 Jan 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itta/38/2009 Of Avanti Feeds Ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Th,: appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD IUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHEAND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO lNcoME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 38 of 2009 Appeal filed under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax [Act, ][1961 ][against ][the]Order dated 23-01-2009 [passed ]in |.T.A.No.1170/Hydl04 [for ][Assessment ][year]2OO1-02 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, [Bench-'B', ][Hyderabad]preferred against the Order dated 10-09-2004 passed in ITA No.0065/ClT(Ay04-05 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome [Tax ][(Appeals) ]-ll, [Hyderabad]preferred against the Assessment Order dated 26-03-2004 [passed ][in]P.A.N./G.l.R. No.AABCA7365E on the file of the lncome [Tax ][Department.]Between: Avanti Feeds Ltd.,6-3-658, Somajiguda, Hyderabad [- ]500 082 ...APPELLANT AND Dy. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-1(1), [Aayakar Bhavan, ][Basheerbagh,]Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT\ Counsel for the Appellant: Sri M.V. Ramachandra [Rao(No ][Representation)] Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. J.V. Prasad,(Sr. Standing Counsel for lncome Tax) The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE [J.SREENTVAS RAO] INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL [No.38 ][of ][2OO9] JUDGMENT:[(Per ][the ][Hon'ble ][ttrc Chief Justice AIok ][Aradhe)] None for the appellant Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Senior [Standing Counsel ][for ][Income] Tax Department [for the ][respondent.] 2. None had appeared on behalf of the appeJlant even on 20.r2.2024 3. It appears the appellant is not interested inprosecuting the aPPeal. 4. Th,: appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Miscella:reous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There [r;hal1 ]be no order as to costs. edl-a.v.s.s.c.s.M. JOINT REGISTRARll, V l\L---SECTION OFFICER //TRUE To, 1. The lncome [1-ax ][Appellate ][Tribunal' Bench-'B" ][Hyderabad'] 2. The [Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) ][-ll' ][Hyderabad'] 3. The Deputy [Commissioner of lncome Tax' Circle 1(1)' Hyderabad] 4. One CC to [Sri ][M.V ][Ramachandra ][Rao, ][Advocate ][ ] 'v 5. One CC to Mr. J.V. Prasad (Sr- Standing Counsel for lncome Tax) 6. Two CD Copies kam/ghw / HIGH COURT DATED:07 tO1t2O2S\\JUDGMENTITTA.No.38 of 2009 THE APPEAL ISDISMISSED FORWANT OF PROSECUTION .o€@€w,il(e5 3[(liF- ][s ][r4][ 14-](or10 |t_DI l-r2025zaa/*:-sF4ic\rf--o \1 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan