Itta/8/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajahmundry v. Konda Krishnam Raju
High Court
26 Aug 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/8/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajahmundry v. Konda Krishnam Raju
Date of order
26 Aug 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/8/2003 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajahmundry v. Konda Krishnam Raju, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
I.T.T.A No.8 OF 2003
JUDGMENT:-(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy)
This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (forshort, ‘the Act’) is filed against the order dated 11.04.2002 passed by theVisakhapatnam Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inI.T.A.No.279/V/1998.
The necessity for us to deal with the merits of the matter is obviated onaccount of the fact that the learned Senior Standing Counsel for theappellant, in all fairness, stated that the tax impact in this case is less thanthe limits stipulated under Section 268A of the Act.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this appeal shall also standdisposed of.
___________________________
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J
Date:26.08.2014Kdl/gk
____________________________
CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
kdl/gk
I.T.T.A No.8 OF 2003
Date:26.08.2014
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