Case Law › High Court › Wp/20257/2009 Of Shri Nomula Prakash Rao...

Wp/20257/2009 Of Shri Nomula Prakash Rao v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad-Ii

High Court 24 Apr 2013 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · taphc

Parties

Date of order

24 Apr 2013

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Wp/20257/2009 Of Shri Nomula Prakash Rao v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad-Ii, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINIAnd THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20257 OF 2009 Dated: 24.04.2013 Between: Nomula Prakash Rao .. Petitioner And The Chief Commissioner of Income Taxand two others.. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINIAnd THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20257 OF 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Ms. Justice G.Rohini) Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a letter in the Registrystating that he has been instructed by the petitioner to withdraw the writpetition as he is not interested to pursue the matter further. Accordingly, permission is granted and the Writ Petition isdismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in thiswrit petition shall stand closed. ____________ G.ROHINI, J ____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date : 24.04.2013Ivd/ssp

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.