Case LawHigh Court › Itta/564/2017 Of Principal Commissioner...

Itta/564/2017 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S Adp Pvt Ltd., Hyd

High Court 08 Sep 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/564/2017 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S Adp Pvt Ltd., Hyd
Date of order
08 Sep 2022
Assessment year(s)
2007-2008, 2009-2010, 2010-201, 2008-2009
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itta/564/2017 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S Adp Pvt Ltd., Hyd, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view of above, thc appeals are dismissed on withdrawal Counsel for the Re ;pondent in ail Appeals: SRI A.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABD THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY |.T.T.A.Nos.351 & 602 of 2016300 564 586 ol 201725O ot 2018and 339 of 2019 ITTA.No.351 of 2016 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellant Tdbunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'Hyderabad in ITA No.857l{ydl2005 for assessment Year 2007-2008 dated12.02.2016 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax(Appeals)-Vll, Hyderabad, ITA No.0143/DCIT 9 (1yClT (A)-Vll/2013-14 dated29.04.2015 preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax,Circle-9 (1), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No. dated 10.O1.2014.Between: The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7, lT Towers, A.C. Guards,Masabtank, Hyderabad. .,.APPELLANT AND M/s. Deccan Grameena Bank,9-2711 , First Floor, Lalitha Nagar,Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad-500060. (PAN No. ) ...RESPONDENT ITTA.No.602 of 2016 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'Hyderabad in ITA No.1742lHydl2014 for assessment Year 20'10-2011 dated25.03.2015 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax(Appeals)-Vl, Hyderabad, Appeal No.009212O13-141 CIT (A)-Vl dated 29.08.2014preferred against the Order of the lncome Tax Officer Ward-9 (4), HyderabadPAN/G lR No.AAAAD3893M dated 25.O3.2O I 3. Between: The Principal C orrmissioner of lncome Tax-7, Hyderabad. ...APPEI.L.ANT/PETITION ER AND Deccan Grame :na Bank, 9-27 1 1, 1 st Floor, Lalitha Nagar D)ilsukhnagar,Hyderabad .,.RESPONDENT ITTA.No.300 ol 2017 lncome Tax T ibr.rnal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the ordr r of the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal, l'ly'derabad Bench ['A']Hyderabad in ITA \o.936lHydl2o15 for assessment Year 2O11-2012 dated03.08.2016 preferrec against lhe Order of the Commissiorer of lncome Tax(Appeals)-Vll, Hyder rb,ad, ITA No.0144/DCIT I (1yClT rl,)/Vlli2013-14 dated29.O4.2015 preferred lgainst the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax,Circle 9 (1), Hyderabz I PAN/GIR No. dated 30.01 .i1014. Between: Prinicipal Con rissioner Of lncome Tax-7, 3rd Floor. A-Block, l.T.Towers,A.C.Guards, M rs.abtank, Hyderabad-4 ,..APPELLANT AND fVl/s. Deccan G arneena Bank, (Presently Known as Telarrgana GrameenaBank)9-2711, I irst Floor, Lalitha Nagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hydr::rabad. (PAN No.AAAAD3893MAAAAD3893M ...RESPONDENT lTTA.No.564 of 2017 Income Tax T ibunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,'196'1 against the ordt r r>f the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal, l.lyderabad Bench 'B'Hyderabad in ITA \cr.134lHydl2o14 for assessment Yea' 2009-2010 dated18.01 .2017 preferred aggainst the Order of the Additional Cornmissioner of IncomeTax (Transfer Pricir g), 6th floor, B Block, lT Towers, l-ly(jerabad, in PAN18.01 .2017 preferred aggainst the Order of the Additional Cornmissioner of IncomeTax (Transfer Pricir g), 6th floor, B Block, lT Towers, l-ly(jerabad, in PANNo.AAACW2655C dzteri 28.01.2013 preferred against the C)rder of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1 ( 1), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.AAACW2655Cdated 03.12.20'13.dated 03.12.20'13. Between: The Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax -1, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND M/s. ADP P\i(. Ltd.,6-3-1091/C/1 , Fortune-9, Raj Bhavan Road,HYDERABAD.50OOs2. ...RESPONDENT ITTA.No.586 of 2017 Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1 ( 1), Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.AAACW2655Cdated 03.12.20'13.dated 03.12.20'13. Between: The Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax -1, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND M/s. ADP P\i(. Ltd.,6-3-1091/C/1 , Fortune-9, Raj Bhavan Road,HYDERABAD.50OOs2. ...RESPONDENT ITTA.No.586 of 2017 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ['A']Hyderabad in ITA No.453lHydl2O14 for assessment Year 2009-2010 dated19.10.2016 preferred against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of lncomeTax (Transfer Pricing), 6th floor, B Block, lT Towers, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad, inPAN No.AAACF2723N dated 28.0'1.2013 preferred against the Order of the DeputyCommissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1 (2), Hyderabad PANiGIR No. AAACF2723Ndated 21.01 .2O14. Between: The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax- l, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND M/s. Conextant Systems Private Limited, 5th Floor, Pioneer Towers, Plot.No.16, Survey No. 64/2, Software Units Layout, Madhapur, HYDERABAD-50008116, Survey No. 64/2, Software Units Layout, Madhapur, HYDERABAD-500081 ...RESPONDENT |TTA.No.25O ol 2018 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the order of the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'Hyderabad in ITA No.792lHydl2016 for assessment Year 2010-201 1 dated27.10.2017 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax __ L_N,- (Appeals)-1, Hyderab, rd, Appeal No.0134/ClT (A)-llHyd/2O13 ['14, ]2015-16 dated17.02.2016 preferred rgainst the Order of the Deputy Commiss oner of lncome Tax,Circle 1 (2), Hyderaba I PAN/GIR No. dated 28.03.2013 Between: The Principal C ommissioner of lncome Tax-I, HYDERABT\D ...APPELLANT AND firl/s. Celon Lak cratories Pvt. Ltd, Flat no.102, Shriyas Elergance, 3-6-643,street no.9, Hir rayathnagar, HYDERABAD-500029 ...RESPONDENT ITTA.No.339 of 2019 lncome Tax T-ibunal Appeal Under Section 260-4 of ihe lncome Tax Act,1961 against the ord ;r of the lncome Tax Appellant Tribunal {yderabad Bench ['A']Hyderabad in ITA \o.17751{yd12017 for assessment Year 2008-2009 dated31 .01 .2019 preferre, against the Order of the Commissic,ner of lncome Tax(Appeals)-ll, Hyderalrad, Appeal No.0544/DCITCC-1(3)/ClT (A)-ll/Hyd109-10113-14dated 10.08.2017 p eferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner oflncome Tax, Cent al Circle 6, Hyderabad dated 31 ..111.2009 in PAN/GIRNo. . Betwee n: The Principal )ommissioner of lncome-Tax, (Central) Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND Shri Bujunuri ogi Reddy, 2-2-115O11, Tilak Nagar, Hyder:rbad....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Ap rellant in all Appeals: SRI AJAY KUMAFI KULAKARNI,REPRESENTING FOR SRI B. NT.RASIMHA SARMASC FOR I.T. DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Re ;pondent in ail Appeals: SRI A. V. A. Sl\rA KARTIKEYAThe Court made th,,following: COMMON JUDGMENT ON'BLE TrIIEFSTICE UAND THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY 6,1 & 58ft70 of 2018 and 339 of 2019 COMMON JUDGMENT : [(Per ]Ae t lor'bte rt,t Chiei Iu tie [tlit/ ]Btulu) I{eard Mr. Aiay I(umar I(ulkarni, lcatned counselrepresenting Mr. B.Narsimha Sarma, lcarned Standing Counsel lorthe appellant-Income [-I'ax ]Department and Mr. A.V.A.SivaI(artikeya, learned counscl for thc respondcnts Learncd counscl [r-lr the appcllant submits that in view ofsettlement under the Dircct f tx Vivad Sc Vishwas Scheme, 2020,appellant wants to withdraw thc present appeals. In view of above, thc appeals are dismissed on withdrawal Counsel for the Re ;pondent in ail Appeals: SRI A. V. A. Sl\rA KARTIKEYAThe Court made th,,following: COMMON JUDGMENT ON'BLE TrIIEFSTICE UAND THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY 6,1 & 58ft70 of 2018 and 339 of 2019 COMMON JUDGMENT : [(Per ]Ae t lor'bte rt,t Chiei Iu tie [tlit/ ]Btulu) I{eard Mr. Aiay I(umar I(ulkarni, lcatned counselrepresenting Mr. B.Narsimha Sarma, lcarned Standing Counsel lorthe appellant-Income [-I'ax ]Department and Mr. A.V.A.SivaI(artikeya, learned counscl for thc respondcnts Learncd counscl [r-lr the appcllant submits that in view ofsettlement under the Dircct f tx Vivad Sc Vishwas Scheme, 2020,appellant wants to withdraw thc present appeals. In view of above, thc appeals are dismissed on withdrawal No costs.SD/-K.SRINIVRAOJOINRARi /TRUE COPY//IISECTION OFFICERTo,1.The lncome [Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ]['A" ][Hvderabad']2.i# iffi;; i;; [AEF;i6"1r,i6;;;i: ][HiJ""uiJ ][Bench'B'' ][Hvderabad']3.iii; b;;;1";i";"ibr [lnco.e rax ][(Apbeals)-Vll, Hvderabad']4.+# #;i; c;;mlssioner [of ][lnComd ][tax, ][circle ][9 ][(1)' ][Hvderabad']5.ih; tn;'o;'" iix officer, [ward-9 ][(4), Hvderabad]b.The Additional [commissioner ][oi ][r#ti'L ][ili ][(Tr"nsfer ][Pricing)' ][6'n ][Floor']B Block, [lT Towers, Hyderabad-4']7.in?"o?'ct.-.iisidne'r [ot ][lncome Tax, ][circle ][-1 ][(1)' ][Hvderabad]6.+il: ;l ;#;i;iioner ot [tncome ][tax, ][circle ][-1 (2), Hvderabad']9.10ine ci;;Ei'i;'$-d cirmmissioner -trtarasimna [of ][lncome Tax ]sarmi, [(Appeals)-ll' ]S c for lr [HyderaDa-o.]Dept IoPUCI115# 6d i;5;i [A. Siva Kartikeva, Advocate ][[oPUC]]12. Two CD [Copies]13. One SPare [CoPY]gbr I HIGH COURT DATED: 08/0912022 tl 2 lrrl'J 2!?2COMMON JU DGMENTlTTA.Nos.3s1 & 602 of 2016300 564 586 a't 2017250 ot2018;gtrd_339_r f 2019DISMISSING THE ALL APPEALSAS WITHDRI,WNWITHOUT C()STS[t][o],w1 ) 1
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