Case Law › High Court › Rc/135/2000 Of Commissioner Of Income Ta...

Rc/135/2000 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.d.shah Secunderabad

High Court 03 Apr 2012 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · taphc

Parties

Date of order

03 Apr 2012

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Rc/135/2000 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.d.shah Secunderabad, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKURANDHON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR R.C.NO.135 OF 2000 DATED: 03.04.2012 Between COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXA.P I, HYDERABAD … ApplicantAndSRI R.D.SHAH,SECUNDERABAD … Respondent HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKURANDHON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR R.C.NO.135 OF 2000 Order:(per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Madan B. Lokur) The tax effect in this case is said to be less than Rs.1,00,000/-. 2. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this Referred Case.3. The Referred Case is dismissed with costs of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees one thousand only) to be paid to the A.P. State LegalService Authority, Hyderabad within two weeks. 4. List for compliance on 4.7.2012. ___________________ MADAN B. LOKUR, CJ ___________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Dt: 03-04-2012 tnb HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKURANDHON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR R.C.NO.135 OF 2000 Order:(per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Madan B. Lokur) tnb DATED: 03-04-2012.

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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.