Wp/25246/2006 Of Indian Institute Of Health And Family Welfare v. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Ii
High Court
12 Sep 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/25246/2006 Of Indian Institute Of Health And Family Welfare v. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Ii
Date of order
12 Sep 2023
Assessment year(s)
2003-2004
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/25246/2006 Of Indian Institute Of Health And Family Welfare v. The Assistant Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions)-Ii, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO: 25246 OF 2006
Between:
lndian lnstitute of Health & Family Welfare, (Govt. of A.P.) H.No. B-3-167/HFW,Vengalraonagar, Hyderabad, Rep by its Director C.B.S. Venkata Ramana...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Assistant Director of lncome Tax [(Exemptiong)-ll, ]Hyderabad.
2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax [(Appeals)-lV, ]3'" Floor, Ayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
3. The Director of lncome Tax (Exemptions), A.P. Olympic Bhavan, L.B.Stadium,Basheerabagh, Hyderabad.Basheerabagh, Hyderabad.
4. rhe Branch Manaser, Andhra Bank, Sanjeevareddy""nr. n,rSElISAt DENTSDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia [praying ]that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction one in the nature of Mandamus declaringthe order of the 3'd respondent in Letter No.226 DIT(E)/Stay/2006-2007, dated15-11-2006 as illegal, bad and violative of Art. 14 of the constitution of lndia andset aside the same directing the 1tt respondent not to take any coercive steps forthe recovery of the petitioner's tax dues for the assessment year 2003-2004pending disposal of ita appeal before the 3'd respondent and pass such otherorder or orders as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP. NO: 32324 OF 2006)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stayall the recovery proceedings for the assessment year 2003-2004 initiated by the1't respondent including the notice No. 266(3)/ADIT(E)-ll/HYD, dt. 29-9-2006
issued under section 2:16(3) of the lncome Tax Act ['1961 ]to the 4tr' rer;pondent, theBranch Manager, Andhra Bank pending disposal of the above !\'ril Petition
Counsel for the Petitir,ner : SRI A.V.KRISHNA KOUNDIIIYA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3 : Ms K.MAMA'[A, SO t:OF: INCOMETAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI K.RAJI REDDY, SC F()Fl INCOME TAX
Counsel for the Resp,rndent No.4 : SRI V.DYUMANI
The Court made the f,>llowing: ORDER
IIONOURABLE SRI .IUSTICE P.SAM KOSITYANDIION'BLE SRI WSTICE LA:OVII NARAYANA ALISIIETTY
WRIT PETITION NO.25246 OF 2006
ORI)ER:troer ao n'ble Sii JtLstie P-Som Koshg/
Heard, Sri A.V.Krishna Kaundinya, learned counsel for thepetitioner, Ms. K.Mamatha learned standing counsel forrespondent Nos. 1 and 3, Sri K.Raji Reddy, learned StandingCounsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri V.Dyumani, learnedcounsel for the respondent No.4.petitioner, Ms. K.Mamatha learned standing counsel forrespondent Nos. 1 and 3, Sri K.Raji Reddy, learned StandingCounsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri V.Dyumani, learnedcounsel for the respondent No.4.
2. The instant writ petition has been Iiled aggrieved by theorder dated 15.11.2006 passed by respondent No.3, whereby theapplication for grant of stay under Section 220(61 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 was rejected. The instant writ petition is one, whichwas hled in the year 20O6 and interim order was granted in favourof the petitioner as early on lL.l2.2OO6. The interim ordercontinues to be in operation till date. The interim relief prayed bythe petitioner was, the stay of recovery proceedings arising out ofthe order dated 24.O3.2006 passed by the Assessing Officer till thehnalization of the appeal.
3. The facts are that the assessment order was dated24.O3.2006,which \Mas subjected to challenge before therespondentNo.2 ald during the pendency of theappeal,the
2. The instant writ petition has been Iiled aggrieved by theorder dated 15.11.2006 passed by respondent No.3, whereby theapplication for grant of stay under Section 220(61 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 was rejected. The instant writ petition is one, whichwas hled in the year 20O6 and interim order was granted in favourof the petitioner as early on lL.l2.2OO6. The interim ordercontinues to be in operation till date. The interim relief prayed bythe petitioner was, the stay of recovery proceedings arising out ofthe order dated 24.O3.2006 passed by the Assessing Officer till thehnalization of the appeal.
3. The facts are that the assessment order was dated24.O3.2006,which \Mas subjected to challenge before therespondentNo.2 ald during the pendency of theappeal,the
petitioner hen:in moved an application for grant cf intr:rim reliefbefore the Asr;essing Officer under Section 220(61 of the Incomebefore the Asr;essing Officer under Section 220(61 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961, which was rejected, against which thr: instant writpetition has b een filed. It is about 17 years that wdt petition ispending befor,: this Court. In all probabililv, the ztpp:al beforerespondent Nrl.2 also in the intervening period rmrst have gotdecided.decided.
4. In view of the same, we do not inter d to keep tJle writpetition pend rg any further. The Writ Petition accor<lingly standsdisposed of. Ir onetheless, in case, if the appeal is :;till pending,respondent No.2 is expected to decide the appreal within a furtherperiod of threr: (O3) months. Meanwhile, the interirn relief earliergranted woulc also remain in operation. If the allpe al standsdecided, the ir rterim order loses its efficacy arrtom:Ltical y. Thereshall be no order as to costs.
5. Pending miscellaneous applications, il- any, shall standclosed.
To
Kj.
SD/- C, PRAVEEN KUMARASSI$TANI REGISTRARSECTION OFFTCERASSI$TANI REGISTRARSECTION OFFTCER
//TRUE COPY//
1. The Assistant E irector of lncome Tax (Exemptions)-ll, Hyjerab,ad.
Hyjerab,ad.2. The Commissioner of tncome Tax (Appeats)_tv, sd ftboi, e Tiiii Afravan,Basheerbagh, l lyderabad.The Commissioner of tncome Tax (Appeats)_tv, sd ftboi, e Tiiii Afravan,Basheerbagh, l lyderabad.
3. The Director of ncome Tax (Exemptions). A p. Olyrnpic Bharvarr, L.B.Stadium, Bashe erabagh, erabagh, Hyderabid.Stadium, Bashe erabagh, erabagh, Hyderabid.
Bashe erabagh, erabagh, Hyderabid.4. The Branch Ma rager,IAndlrra Bank, Sanjeevaredd Sanjeevaredd ynaga., l-]yderabad.
Bank, Sanjeevaredd Sanjeevaredd 5. One CC to Sri t.V:Krishna Koundinya, nrivocaie fOhudi
Koundinya, nrivocaie 6. One CC to Ms li.[\4amata, SC for tncome Tax tOiU]l[[']][[']]
7. One CC to Sri \ .Dyumani, Advocate tOpUCl [[']]
tOpUCl 9. 9n" QQ 9n" QQ QQ [t^o ][Sf ][t<.Raji ][Reddy. ] [for ][t ][r ][, ]topucl
9. 9n" QQ 9n" QQ QQ 9. Two CD Copies9. Two CD Copies
HIGH COURTDATED:12l09/2023
ORDERWP.No.25246 of 2006
DISPOSING OF THE !\'P WITHOUT COSTS.
(C\-,/ 'L-L-\{t"'---'-'-L'\o\'/
-- [j=:.]vy': ',,6. [t;1}\T6]o,./1;"'t)lt:)1 ['\ ][t'ti ][1$B]\\)\, r')+\r.J\\
t
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.