Itta/88/2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. National Mineral Development Corporation Limited
High Court
13 Dec 2021 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/88/2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. National Mineral Development Corporation Limited
Date of order
13 Dec 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itta/88/2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. National Mineral Development Corporation Limited, the High Court (2021) decided the matter.
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 FOR AT HYDERABAD
fVONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANANDTHE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI
l.T.T.A. NO: 88 OF 2019
lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal under Section 260-A of the lncome [Tax ][Act' ][1961 ],against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate [Tribunal, ][Hyderabad ][Bench ]['B']Hyderabad in ITA No.1291H12011 for assessmenl [year ][2004-05 ][dated ][Bl7l2o11]preferred against the order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax [(Appeals)-V ]Hyderabadin ITA No.332/Addl.ClT-16/C|T(A)-V/ 2009-10 dated [1111112010 ][preferred against ][the]Order of the Additional Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax, ][Range-16, Hyderabad ][in ] No.AAACN7325 A dated 2911212009.
Between:
The Commissioner of lncome Tax-lV, Hyderabad
...APPELLANT
AND
National l\rlineral Devetopment Corporation limited, [Khaniji bhavan ][10-3-31 ][1/A, Castle]Hills, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.
.,.RESPONDENT
For the Appellant : SRI J.V.PRASAD, [SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT]
For the Respondent : SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA, SRI S.DWARAKANATH, Advocates
The Court delivered the following: Judgment
HONOT IIABLE [JUSTI(][, U.IJAL ][I}FIU\"\\]ANI)HONOI.IR [\ItL[, ][SMT..IUSTICE ][P. ][MADI{AVI I)IIVI]
1.1'. f .A.fio.[88()][ F ][2019]
.lllDGMI1NTi 1l [tr ][H'n ][htL ][\rtJtt.\ti'( ] [il ][lBhu\dnt]
Fleard Mr. [.V.Prasad. learned Standing ][Counsel ][tor ][the ][itppellatlt-]Incorne [l ]ax [De ]'artnlent [and ][Mr'P ][Karthik ][Ranrana' ][Icarnetl ][cttunscl]rcprescnting [Mr. ][i.I)$arakanath' ][learned ][counsel ][ftlr ][the ][rcspondent-]ASSESSCE
2. This appee [by ][the ][revenue ][under Section 260,4 ][of ][the ][ltlcoue ][Iitx]Act, l96l is [dir:cted ][against ][the ][order ][of ][the ][lncolne ]['fax ][r\ppellate]Tribunal in llA [No.129/Hyd/2011 ][dated ][0807'2011 ][tbr ][the ][assessment]year 2004-05.
3. It is subr [ittcd ][the ][respondcnt-assessee ][has settled ][the ][matter]under the [Vivad ][Se ][Vishwas ][Scheme ][which ][has ][been ][approved ][by ][the]
lncome [Tax ][De1 ][anment.]
4In that v ew [ol- ][the ][lnatter, appellant ][seeks ][to ][u ][lthdrar'i ][the]
appeal.
is [accordingly, ][disposed ][ol ][on ][withdrawal']Appeal
5.
Miscellar [eous ][applications, ][if ][any ][pending' ][shall ][stand closed]
6
No costs
T
Sd/.K,SRINIVASA RAO.JOII'IT REGISTRARe
//TRUE COPY'
SECTION OFFICER
To
1The lncome Tax tppellate [Tribunal, ][Bench'B' ][Hyderabad.]2The Commission [,r ]of lncome [Tax (Appeals)-V, ][Hyderabad.]3The Additional Cr mmissioner of [lncome Tax, Range-16, ][Hyderabad]4One CC to Sri J.\ .Prasad, SC [for ][l.T.Department (OPUC)]5One CC to Sri S.l)warakanath, Advocate [(OPUC)]6Two CD Copies7One Spare CopyK12The Commission [,r ]of lncome [Tax (Appeals)-V, ][Hyderabad.]3The Additional Cr mmissioner of [lncome Tax, Range-16, ][Hyderabad]4One CC to Sri J.\ .Prasad, SC [for ][l.T.Department (OPUC)]5One CC to Sri S.l)warakanath, Advocate [(OPUC)]6Two CD Copies7One Spare CopyK1
,)$U'-
DATED:1311212021
JUDGMENTITTA.No.88 of 2019
DISPOSING OF THE I' TA AS [COSTS.]
StO\n>?iv
1lii [slAr€](0 5 JAN [2022]oo).ot*oEspAT c,t
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.