The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv,Hyderabad v. Praga Tools Limited,60
High Court
09 Jul 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv,Hyderabad v. Praga Tools Limited,60
Date of order
09 Jul 2012
Assessment year(s)
2004-05
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv,Hyderabad v. Praga Tools Limited,60, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the facts and circumstances, no question of law,let alone a substantial question of law arises forconsideration in this appeal which is dismissed at thestage of admission.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR
I.T.T.A. No. 81 of 2012 Dated 09-07-2012
Between:
The Commissioner of Income Tax IV,Hyderabad.
…Appellant
Vs.
Praga Tools Limited,60-010, CIE, Gandhinagar,Balanagar, Hyderabad.
…Respondent
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR
I.T.T.A.No. 81 of 2012
Dated: 09-07-2012
ORAL ORDER: (Per: GR,J)
No substantial question of law arises forconsideration in this appeal preferred by the Revenueunder Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (forshort ‘the Act’), against the order of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench (for short‘Tribunal’) dated 24-10-2008. The assessee preferredthe appeal to the Tribunal against the order dated 30-08-2007 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) V,Hyderabad, in respect of the assessment year 2004-05, whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmedthe order of the Assessing Officer holding that long termcapital gain on sale of the assessee’s land at Kavadiguda,Secunderabad, in favour of CPWD and another unit ofNTPC accrued during the assessment year 2004-05.
The Tribunal on critical consideration of the factsand circumstances on record recorded the conclusion onfact that the assessee had handed over possession of theland, of an extent of Ac.2.108 Cts., to CPWD in the year2004-05 and not the previous year 2003-04 as contendedby the Revenue. This finding was recorded on the basisof letter dated 13-12-2006 addressed by the CPWDwhereby CPWD stated clearly that they had takenpossession of the land from the assessee on 03-06-2004and not on the date of the agreement of sale i.e., 02-09-2003.
In the facts and circumstances, no question of law,let alone a substantial question of law arises forconsideration in this appeal which is dismissed at thestage of admission. No costs.
__________________________ JUSTICE GODA
RAGHURAM
____________________________ JUSTICE N. RAVISHANKAR
Dated: 09-07-2012 Pvks/*
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.
EaseValue