Wp/18258/2006 Of Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sahu v. Union Of India, Department Of Income-Tax Rep By Deputy
High Court
28 Mar 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · aphc
Parties
Wp/18258/2006 Of Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sahu v. Union Of India, Department Of Income-Tax Rep By Deputy
Date of order
28 Mar 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/18258/2006 Of Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sahu v. Union Of India, Department Of Income-Tax Rep By Deputy, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
APHC010232272006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
[3526]
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.18258 of 2006
Between:
1. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sahu S/o Narayanalal Sahu, Partner M/s. Nishi Egg Centre, near Y. Junction, By-pass road, Pydiparru, Tanuku, West Godavari District, rep by GPA Holder Sanjay Kumar Shaw S/o Narayanalal ShawEgg Centre, near Y. Junction, By-pass road, Pydiparru, Tanuku, West Godavari District, rep by GPA Holder Sanjay Kumar Shaw S/o Narayanalal Shaw
...Petitioner
AND
1.Union of India, Department of Income Tax, rep. by Deputy Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) Rajahmundry, and others.Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) Rajahmundry, and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.A Srinivasa Sarma
Counsel for the Respondents:
1.Vijay Kumar Punna
2.Divya Datla (Central Government Counsel)
The Court made the following ORDER:(per NJS,J)
Though the matter is listed under the caption “For Dismissal”, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Ms.Divya Datla, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government appeared through online. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter.
2. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
NINALA JAYASURYA,J
March 28, 2025 vasu
_____________________________________
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO,J
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