Itta/89/2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. Dr.reddys Laboratories Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 89 of 2019 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 arising out of the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, HyderabadBench 'A', Hyderabad in ITA No.739/Hydl20O7, Assessment Year: 2003-04, dated29-1O-2O1O preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax ,(Appeals)-ll, Hyderabad, ITA No.0558/CIT(A)-1U05-06, dated:30-03-2007 preferredagainst the Order of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -1(2),Hyderabad, PAN/GIR No. AAACD 7999 Q, dated 27-02-2006. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-|, Hyderabad ANDDr.Reddy's Laboratories Limited, 7-1-2T,Ameerpet,Hyderabad. ...Appellant ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI J.V. PRASAD, Sr SC FOR INCOME TAXappearing for SRI S.P. CHIDAMBARAM Counsel for the Respondent: SRI M. VENKATRAM REDDYThe Court made the following: ORDER THE ]{ON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSIil'AND THE HON'BLI} SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYA.NA ALISHETTYI.T.T.A.No.89 of 2OL9 ORI)ER: [(per ]aon [? ]'e [.Sn ][Jushce ][P. ][S,AII ]KosIIn) Heard Sri J.V. Prasad, learned Senior Standin6l Oounsel forIncome Tax appr:aring for the appellant and Sri [Si.P. ] [)-rirlanrbaram,]learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the [recorcl.] 2. With the consent of the parties, this appezLl wa:; tuken up onadmission. 3. This appr:a[ has been filcd assaiiing the order dated29.lO.2OlO pas,;ed in ITA.No.739 lHyd/2OO7 fcrr thr: li.ssr:ssmentYear 2O03-04 c n the file of the learned lncome Ta-.: AppellateTribunal, Hyder:rbad Bench 'B', Hvderabad (hen:inaflr:r referred toas 'the Tribunal' . 4. A perusal of the findings given by the Tritrunal w,rulC revealthat in respect cf the Issue No.l, the Tribunal has in fact accededto the request of the Departmental representativ( befcre theTribunal and h 1s remanded back the matter to tlre Ar;sessingOfficer for fresh :onsideration of the issue and as far rts Issue No.2is concerned, there is a categorical finding given b-y the l'ribunalthat the Depart nent has not brought on record anv inalerial tosubstantiate thr' contention that the expenditure ircurred wasagainst public p<,[icy so as to disallou, the same. .,On due consideration of the above, we do not find anysubstantial question of law made out by the appellant calling foranysubstantial question of law made out by the appellant calling foran interference with the impugned order dated 29.1O.2023 passedby the Tribunai.by the Tribunai. 6The appeal thus fails and is accordingly rejected. There shallbe no order as to costs_be no order as to costs_ Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, sha standclosed. Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAOJOINT REGISTRARaSECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To,1.The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad.2.The Commissioner of lncome Tax , (Appeals)-ll, Hyderabad.3.The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -1(2), Hyderabad4.One CC to SRI J.V. PRASAD, Senior SC FOR INCOME TAX 5.One CC to SRI M. VENKATRAM REDDY, Advocate 6.Two CD Copies1.The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad.2.The Commissioner of lncome Tax , (Appeals)-ll, Hyderabad.3.The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -1(2), Hyderabad4.One CC to SRI J.V. PRASAD, Senior SC FOR INCOME TAX 5.One CC to SRI M. VENKATRAM REDDY, Advocate 6.Two CD Copies kampr HIGH COURDATED:2510t112023 ORDERlTTA.No.89 ol 2019 THE APPEAL REJECTED 1$ [I€]i+t,/,'::ft,)lr(j3[ [[ [?m](-,,v4.\ Io>/