Itta/807/2006 Of Sri Siddhi Vinayaka Agro Extractions Ltd., Zaheerabad v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE AXMI INCOME TA( TRIBUNAL APPEAL [No: ][807 ][of2006] lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal [Under Section ][260A ][of ][the ][lncome Tax ][Act, ]['1961]arising out of the order of the [lncome-Tax ][Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad'Bench ][' ] ['](SMC) Hyderabad, in ITA No.384/Hyd/2004, for assessment [Year ][1997-98 ][dated ][31-]1O-2OOO preferred against the Order of [thg ][Commissioner ][of ][lncome ][Tax,](APPEALS)lV, Hyderabad, Appeal No.031 0/DC-3(1 )/ClT(A)-lV/2002-03,dated:05-01 [-]2004, preferred against the Order of [the Deputy Commissioner ][of ][lncome Tax ][3(1),]Hyderabad PAN/GIR No.SH-37/ , [dated 28-01-2003.] Between: Shree Siddhi Vinayaka Agro Extractions [Ltd., ZaheerabaQ,, ][R"p, ][by ][its ][Managing]Director Purshotta-m Palloed, S/o Late [Sri ][Govardhanlal Palloed, aged about ][50]years, Zaheerabad. ...Appellant AND 1 . Commissioner of lncome [Tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.] 2. Deputy Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax, ][Circle ]- [3(1 ]), [Hyderabad.] ' ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: M/s. [C. ]JAYASREE [SARATHY and SIDDHARTH]TOSHNIWAL(NoI Present) Counsel for Respondents: [Ms. K. MAMATA CHOUDARY, ] [lT]DEPT. The Court delivered the following:'JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTYI.T.T.A. No.8O7 of 2006 JUDGMENT:U,, , t toa't,t, Sn Jrrcrr.n [p.seM ]NoSHyJ There is no representation on behalf of the appellant onthe previous date of hearing. Yesterday a_lso, i.e., on29.08.2023, there lr'as no representation on behalf of theappellant in spite of repeated cal1s being made which compelledus to adjourn the matter to to-day. Even to-day, there is norepresentation on behalf of the appellant. 2. Undcr given circumstances, we are left with no otheroption but to ciismiss the appeal fcr default as well as for non-prosecution. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for default as well aslor no n -prosccution. No costs. 4. Consequentl),, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,shall sland closed. SD/- B.S.GHIRANJEEVIJOTULREGISTRARqDSECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The lncome-Tax Appellate [Tribunal, ][Hyderabad Bench ' B ][' ][(SMC)]Hyderabad.Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner [of ][lncome Tax, ][(APPEALS)IV, ][Hyderabad'] 3. The Deputy Commissioner [of ][lncome Tax ][3(1), ][Hyderabad'] 4. One CC to M/s [C. ] [SARATHY and Siddharth Toshwniwal,]Advocate IOPUC]Advocate IOPUC] 5. One CC to [Ms. K. MAMATA ][CHOUDARY, ] [FOR lT ] IOPUCI \r\ . tr:l-[[\ ]][/'{]IOPUCI \r\ . tr:l-[[\ ]][/'{] 6. Two CD Copies [[\ ]][/'{] HIGH COURT DATED:30108t2023 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.807 of 2006 1tl [STAIe:][-:.\]()oC)()$5 [w!zts].bs*t:) THE APPEAL !S DISMISSED FOR DEFAULTAS WELL AS FOR NON.PROSECUTION ?)