Itta/589/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. Akula Nageswara Rao
High Court
19 Sep 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/589/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. Akula Nageswara Rao
Date of order
19 Sep 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/589/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. Akula Nageswara Rao, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.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
* I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
* HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE V.RAMASUBRAMANI AN AND
HON’BLE SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI
+ I .T.T.A.No.589 of 2017
% Date: 19-09-2017
Betw een:
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Hyderabad.
And
Akula Nageswara Rao, Prop. Kamakshi Bankers Near Tower Clock Centre, Amalapuram, East Godavari District.
… Petitioner
… Respondent
! Counsel for the Petitioner ^ Counsel for the Respondents
: Mr. J.V. Prasad : Mr.
< GI ST: > HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTI CE V.RAMASUBRAMANI AN And HON’BLE SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI
JUDGMENT: (Per VRS,J)
I .T.T.A.No.589 of 2017
It is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department that the tax effect of this appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed under Circular No.21/2015, dated 10.12.2015, and the case does not fall under any of the exceptions prescribed under para-8 of the circular. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
2. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
19[th] September, 2017. Js.
_______________________ V.RAMASUBRAMANI AN, J. ____________ T. RAJANI , J.
Js.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE V.RAMASUBRAMANI AN AND HON’BLE SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI
I .T.T.A.No.589 of 2017
(Per VRS,J)
19[th] September, 2017
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.
EaseValue