Case LawHigh Court › Itta/7/2017 Of The Principal Commissione...

Itta/7/2017 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S. C3I Supports Services Pvt Ltd., Hyd

High Court 24 Mar 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/7/2017 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S. C3I Supports Services Pvt Ltd., Hyd
Date of order
24 Mar 2025
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itta/7/2017 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyd v. M/S. C3I Supports Services Pvt Ltd., Hyd, the High Court (2025) 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

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABD MONDAY, THE TWENW FOURTH DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA ITTA No: 7 ol 2017 Appeal filed under section 260A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 aggrieved bythe order dated 07-04-2016 in ITA No.103/Hyd/2015, for the assessment year2010-11 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench "A",Hyderabad. Between: The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax-'l , Hyderabad. ...Appellant AND M/s. C3i Supports Services Pvt Ltd., 2nd floor, Orion Block, plot.No. 17,Vanenburg lt Part, Software Units Layout, Madhapur, Hyderabad-500081 . ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, Junior Standing Counselrepresenting Mr. J.V. Prasad, Sr. Standing Counsel for lncome Tax Department Counsel forthe Respondent: Sri Ch. Pushyam Kiran The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE [P.SAM ] ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSIN(; NAI\DIKONDA ITTA No.7 OF 2017 JUDGMENT[(per ]Hon'ble Sri Justice [P.Sam ][Koshy)] Heard Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Junior [Standing] Counsel representing Mr. J.V.Prasad, [leamed ][Senio' ][Standing]Counsel lor the Income Tax Department [for ][the appellant. ][Perused]the record. 'lhis appeal under Section 260,{ of the Income Tax Act,260,{ of the Income Tax Act,of the Income Tax Act,the Income Tax Act,Income Tax Act,Tax Act,Act, 'lhis 2. appeal under Section 260,{ of the Income Tax Act,260,{ of the Income Tax Act,of the Income Tax Act,the Income Tax Act,Income Tax Act,Tax Act,Act,1961, has been preferred by the Revenue as th: [appellant]against the order dated 07.04.2016 passed by the [Incorne ][Tax]Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A' [Hyderabad,]lnI.T.A.No. l}3lHydl2}l5 for the Assessment Year [2010- ] 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes [(CBDT) ]has [isst ][ed ][Circular]No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, amending [the previcus ][Circular]No.5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024,by futher [enhancing tlre monetary]timits for filing appeats by the Income [Tax ][Departmen ][t ][before ][the]Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts [and ][Suprerne ][Court] \I as a measure [for ][reducing ][litigation' ][In ][paragraph ][2 ][of ][the ][said]Circular, [we ][find ][that the ][monetary ][limit ][fixed ][for ][filing ][an ][appeal]before the High [Court ][is ][Rs.2.00 crore'] 4. In the instant [appeal, ][tax effect is ][we[[ ][below ][the ][monetary]limit 5. Therefore, the [appeal ][filed ][by the Deparlment ][is ][dismissed in]terms of the [aforesaid ][Circular ][No'9 ][of ][2024 ][dated' 17'09'2024']if [the ][appeal comes ][within ][the ][exception ][of ][Circular]However, No.5 of 2024, [it ][would ][be ][open ][to ][the Income ][Tax ][Department ][to]seek revival [ofthe ][appeal. ][There shall ][be ][no ][order ][as ][to ][costs'] 6. Consequentty, [miscellaneous ][petitions pending' ][il ][any' ][shatt] I HIGH COURT DATED:2410312025 JUDGMENTlTTA.No.7 of 2017 DISMISSING OFTHE APPEAL 1[l6][le{] ;trE [SfA]15:(o1II JUil [zIH]\
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