Itta/399/2013 Of Brij Gopall P.shah (Huf) v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
High Court
10 Sep 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/399/2013 Of Brij Gopall P.shah (Huf) v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Date of order
10 Sep 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/399/2013 Of Brij Gopall P.shah (Huf) v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Hence, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
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. BHANUI.T.T.A.Nos.399 and 400 of 2013
Date:10-09-2013
I.T.T.A.No.399 of 2013:
Between:Brij Gopal P. Shah (HUF)4-3-348/1/C, Sultan Bazar,Bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad.
and
……. Appellant
1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,-Central Circle2, Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
……… Respondent
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAAND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANUI.T.T.A.Nos.399 and 400 of 2013
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
At this moment, we are not inclined to admit these appeals asappropriate applications are said to have been filed before thelearned Tribunal itself impugning the self-same judgment and order,which have been heard and the judgment is awaited.
After the above order is passed, learned counsel for theappellants wants to withdraw the appeals.
Hence, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shallstand closed.
_________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
Date: 10-09-2013YCR
_________________
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.