Itta/616/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. M/S Lahari Homes
High Court
27 Dec 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/616/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. M/S Lahari Homes
Date of order
27 Dec 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/616/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) v. M/S Lahari Homes, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the said judgment andorder, the present appeal is also dismissed.
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 OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OFDECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. No.616 OF 2013
Between:
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),Hyderabad,
..... Appellant
AND
M/s. Lahari Homes,Dr. No. 8-3-833/K1 to K8,Flat No. 303, Krishna Meadows,Sri Nagar Colony, Hyderabad.
.....Respondent
The Court made the following :
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta)
We have heard Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned counsel
for the appellant and gone through the impugnedjudgment and order of the learned Tribunal.
Almost on identical issue, we have dismissed theappeal in ITTA No. 492 of 2013 and Batch by orderdated 24.10.2013. In view of the said judgment andorder, the present appeal is also dismissed. No order asto costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in thisappeal shall stand closed.
______________________
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ.
December 27, 2013MAS
______________Sanjay Kumar, 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.
EaseValue