Itta/41/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 v. Hyderabad Race Club
High Court
01 Aug 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/41/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 v. Hyderabad Race Club
Date of order
01 Aug 2023
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/41/2018 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 v. Hyderabad Race Club, the High Court (2023) 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.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
I, tN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA(AT HYDERABADr!t'iri+'i [TUESDAY-{,THE ] I I I [: ]:i:'jTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREEii I :- r IJllf.I 'l:S PRESENTi i' i'iJt-i.,:.. .r THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYllilANDi i t''lTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTYtl
,i1:. INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 41 OF 2018
(lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, against the orderof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ' A ', Hyderabad in ITA No 23lHydl 2017 for assessment Year 2007-08 dated 06-04-2017 preferred against the Order of theil:I .-Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) 9, Hyderabad, in ITA No. O4lg/DElT, Circle 2 [(2)]tif:.a12015-16,ITANo. 0417'IDCIT .,Circle2(2) 12015-16,ITA No. 141S/DCIT ,Circle2 (2) It.:fa-1,. . ' [fl. ]: ! ['l]'ltir.2015 016 , ITA No. 0427lDClT ., Circle 2 (2) / 2015 -16 dated 29-02-2016 preferred againstItI,ithe Order '1 t . of :1",,. I the Deputy Commissioner c.'of Income tax, Circle [-2 ][(2), ]Hyderabad dated 28-03-tiri: i; 2014inPAN/GIRNo. AAACH2773Ct:(t''Between::Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabadof the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ' A ', Hyderabad in ITA No 23lHydl 2017 for assessment Year 2007-08 dated 06-04-2017 preferred against the Order of theil:I .-Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) 9, Hyderabad, in ITA No. O4lg/DElT, Circle 2 [(2)]tif:.a12015-16,ITANo. 0417'IDCIT .,Circle2(2) 12015-16,ITA No. 141S/DCIT ,Circle2 (2) It.:fa-1,. . ' [fl. ]: ! ['l]'ltir.2015 016 , ITA No. 0427lDClT ., Circle 2 (2) / 2015 -16 dated 29-02-2016 preferred againstItI,ithe Order '1 t . of :1",,. I the Deputy Commissioner c.'of Income tax, Circle [-2 ][(2), ]Hyderabad dated 28-03-tiri: i; 2014inPAN/GIRNo. AAACH2773Ct:(t''Between::Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad
...APPELLANT/ Appellant
I
ANDHyderabad Race Club,'16-10-11N1, Race Course Road, Malakpet, Hyderabad
..RESPONDENT/ Respondent
IItItttiII
i. .':Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. K. MAMATA CHOUDARYCounsel forthe Respondent: SRI Y. RATNAKARitThe Court niade the following: ORDER
tt
TI :E HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE I ION'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARA.''ANA
I.T.T.A. No. 41 of 2018
JUDGMENT lpei H n'rle Si Jus.i&,P.SttIr I(OSI{fJ
Hearcl Ms.I lllarnata, learned Senior Standing Counsel alrpearing forthe appellan .the appellan .
2. This :rppea L n(ler Section 260A of the Incor:re Til: r\ct, 196 I , hasbeen prcfer:-ed 1 y the Revcnuc as the appella;rt agrirrst the orderdt.06.04.20 I 7 par sc cl by thc Income Tax Appellatr Trilrrrrral, HydcrabadBcnch 'A', li,vdt:rz li d, in I.T.A. No.23/ Hyd/2017 for the rrs,;esr;ment year2007 08.
3. Centr:rl Eioz rd o[ Direcl. Taxes (CBDT) has issuetl C ir,;ulir No.17 of2019 dt.08.08.2C l!), amendir.rg the previous Circula_- I'1o.3 of 2Ot8dt.I 1.07.20l,ts, by ltrrther enhancing the monetary limirs lcl frling appealsby the Incon:t: 'I'eu I-repartment before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunals,High Courts al,l [jtrpreme ]Court as a measure for reduc.nr1 lir.igation. inparagraph 2 of [.-1t ]-.ai<l Circular, we find that the moncta-/ limit hxed forfiling an appeal bel rr,: the High Court is Rs.I.0O crore
4. In the rnsl-ar t rtppeal, ta-x eflect is well below tht.monorr:ry limit.
5. Therefore, tl e :rppeal fiied by the Department is disrn:sr;ed in terms ofthe aforesaid Circr- la [- ]No.17 of 20 t9 dt.08.08.2019. llowcv:r if thc appealcomes within rhe e :c:ption under paragraph 10 of CircuLerr l,i,t.3 o1 2018, it
I1,:i:\,
would be open to the Income Tax [Departrnent ][to ][seek ][revival ][of ][the ][appeal']
No order as to costs
6Consequently, miscellaleous [petitions pending, ][if ][any, ][shall ][stand]
closed.
sd/-B [s. ] Cb/TTRUE SECTION
liI*ff;rffib*,i#*#*f##,{ffi"s. ;on" [ctc ][to ][sRliY: ][RATNAKAR ' Advocate ][[oPUC]]ti,ii6..Two cd copi!. [i].+I [i ]['t:],/[; [it,]?iil;liI
4. In the rnsl-ar t rtppeal, ta-x eflect is well below tht.monorr:ry limit.
5. Therefore, tl e :rppeal fiied by the Department is disrn:sr;ed in terms ofthe aforesaid Circr- la [- ]No.17 of 20 t9 dt.08.08.2019. llowcv:r if thc appealcomes within rhe e :c:ption under paragraph 10 of CircuLerr l,i,t.3 o1 2018, it
I1,:i:\,
would be open to the Income Tax [Departrnent ][to ][seek ][revival ][of ][the ][appeal']
No order as to costs
6Consequently, miscellaleous [petitions pending, ][if ][any, ][shall ][stand]
closed.
sd/-B [s. ] Cb/TTRUE SECTION
liI*ff;rffib*,i#*#*f##,{ffi"s. ;on" [ctc ][to ][sRliY: ][RATNAKAR ' Advocate ][[oPUC]]ti,ii6..Two cd copi!. [i].+I [i ]['t:],/[; [it,]?iil;liI
HIGH COURTt'!rirl1.tt1,t,1DATED:01/08/2023it i''.'|,..:f,rl,!.,'.\.'liit i.ll,li;,r'.: ,, 1:i.\T;:,,1 :)^i.r,L-,I '.lI\[E [?s8]'i JUDGitlENr,\'--.--Ii\l'.IITTA.No.4'l of 2018\:IlitfIrli _..Ir:iI!DISMISSIN(i TtlE Il-r [A]WITHOT]T COS'TS':i,t,, i'ir,i,t,t.i;IF:r.I. t,''i/E\I!.b+tr
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.