Case LawHigh Court › Itta/89/2004 Of The Commissionr Of Incom...

Itta/89/2004 Of The Commissionr Of Income Tax-I v. M/S.dasapalle Properties

High Court 10 Dec 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/89/2004 Of The Commissionr Of Income Tax-I v. M/S.dasapalle Properties
Date of order
10 Dec 2014
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itta/89/2004 Of The Commissionr Of Income Tax-I v. M/S.dasapalle Properties, 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

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM I.T.T.A.No.89 of 2004 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy) This appeal, at the instance of the Revenue, is preferred againstthe order, dated 02.07.2003, passed in I.T.A.No.72/Vizag/1998, by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned SeniorStanding Counsel, in all fairness, stated that the tax impact, in thiscase, is below the limit stipulated by the Government under Section268A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as tocosts. The miscellaneous petitions filed in this appeal shall also standdisposed of. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. _____________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J. Date: 10.12.2014 va
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