Case LawHigh Court › Itta/83/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Inco...

Itta/83/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. M/S Neuland Laboratories Ltd

High Court 25 Jun 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/83/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. M/S Neuland Laboratories Ltd
Date of order
25 Jun 2013
Assessment year(s)
2000-01
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itta/83/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. M/S Neuland Laboratories Ltd, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAAND THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.83 of 2013 DATE: 25.06.2013 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV,Hyderabad. … Appellant And M/s. Neuland Laboratories Limited,Hyderabad. … Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A No.83 of 2013 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal in relation to the assessment year 2000-01 is sought to be admitted on the following suggested substantial question of law. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the caseand in law, the Tribunal is correct in law in dismissing the rectificationpetition filed under Section 254(2) of the Act?” We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we have gonethrough the impugned order. It appears that the learned Tribunal has decided the matter relying uponits earlier decision in another matter in respect of the same assessee for theassessment year 2000-01. When an identical issue has been decided andthe department has not preferred an appeal by accepting the said decision,there is no wrong on the part of the Tribunal in relying on its earlier decision. Hence, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ ______________ G. ROHINI, J
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