Wp/27593/2018 Of Nimmagadda Lalitha v. The Principle Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
09 Aug 2019 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/27593/2018 Of Nimmagadda Lalitha v. The Principle Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
09 Aug 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/27593/2018 Of Nimmagadda Lalitha v. The Principle Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 5 The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed leaving all issues open.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMARANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.KESHAVA RAO
ORDER:(Per Sanjay Kumar, J)
W.P.No.27593 OF 2018
1 The petitioner’s grievance is with the action of the Joint Director of Income Tax (Intelligence and Criminal Investigation), Hyderabad, in issuing letter dated 06.3.2018 calling upon her to submit her response in relation to information obtained from the United States of America as to certain monies received by her from the said country. She sought a consequential direction to the Income Tax authorities to consider her representation dated 13.6.2018, whereby she had asked for a copy of the letter obtained by the authorities from the United States of America to enable her to reply appropriately thereto.
2 It appears that certain information was sought from the petitioner in relation to receipt of monies from United States of America in the context of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015.
3 The Deputy Director of Income Tax in the office of the Additional Director of Income Tax, Hyderabad, filed a counter. Relying on the aforestated counter, Sri B.N.Sarma, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue, would inform this Court that under letter dated 31.3.2019, the Director of Income Tax (Intelligence and Criminal Investigation), Hyderabad, forwarded the details of various cases, including that of the petitioner, to the jurisdictional assessing officer for appropriate action, as warranted. Learned counsel would further inform that as on date the respondents are not seized of any investigation into the case of the petitioner.
4 In the light of the aforestated development, the petitioner would have to await further action, if any, initiated by the assessing officer concerned. She
would then have an opportunity to respond thereto. We therefore find no grounds to keep this Writ Petition pending at this stage.
5 The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed leaving all issues open.
6 Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No
order as to costs.
----------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J.
------------------------- P. KESHAVA RAO, J. Date: 9[th] August, 2019. Kvsn
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.