Wp/21527/2017 Of Mohd Idris Khan, Nizamabad v. Income Tax Officer, Nizamabad And 2 Others
High Court
18 Dec 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/21527/2017 Of Mohd Idris Khan, Nizamabad v. Income Tax Officer, Nizamabad And 2 Others
Date of order
18 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp/21527/2017 Of Mohd Idris Khan, Nizamabad v. Income Tax Officer, Nizamabad And 2 Others, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, if the same is maintainable at this length of time.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL
W.P.No.21527 of 2017
Date: 18.12.2017
Between:
Mohd. Idris Khan, Proprietor of M/s.Deccan Saw Mill, D.No.9-20-354, Mujahid Nagar, Bodhan Road, Malapally, Nizamabad. … Petitioner
And Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nizamabad and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Tej Prakash Toshniwal Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. K.Lakshman, Asst. Solicitor General for respondent No.3.
Mr.B.Narasimha Sarma Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department for respondents No.1 and 2
The Court made the following:
Order : (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)
CVNR,J & MSKJ, J W.P.No.21527 of 2017 Date: 18.12.2017
This writ petition is filed for the following substantial relief:
“to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare the action of the authorities under the Act, in with holding the books of accounts and documents under Section 133A of the Act, without providing copies of the books of accounts and documents impounded, seized and taken possession on 12.01.2015 by the 1[st] respondent, is contrary to law and consequently set aside the ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Act for the assessment year 2014-15 dated 28.12.2016 by the 1[st] respondent”.
2. After arguing the case, Mr.Tej Prakash Toshniwal, learned
counsel for the petitioner, requested for permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to his client to file an appeal.
3. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, if the same is maintainable at this length of time.
4. As a sequel, W.P.M.P.No.26459 of 2017 filed by the petitioner,
is dismissed as infructuous.
______________________
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)
_____________________
(M.S.K.Jaiswal, J)
CVNR,J & MSKJ, J W.P.No.21527 of 2017 Date: 18.12.2017
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