Wp/36/2006 Of Attinti Gangahdara Rao v. Income Tax Officer
High Court
03 Jan 2006 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/36/2006 Of Attinti Gangahdara Rao v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
03 Jan 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/36/2006 Of Attinti Gangahdara Rao v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2006) decided the matter.
Decision: The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
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 SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.36 OF 2006
Date:03-01-2006
Between:
Attinti Gangadhara Rao rep. by his
GPA Holder Gutta Subba Rao …Petitioner
And
Income-Tax Officer …Respondent
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.36 OF 2006
O R D E R (Per the Hon’ble Sri Bilal Nazki, J):
Heard learned counsel for the parties and with their consent, the writ petition isbeing disposed of at this stage.
The grievance of the petitioner is that he filed an appeal along with a stayapplication before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. Since theBench is not available, his stay application could not be taken up and on the otherhand he is being pressed for making payments.
Learned senior advocate appearing for the Income Tax Department submits that theBench is likely to resume its work by 16[th] of January, 2006. In this view of the matter,we stay recovery of the disputed tax till 23[rd] of January, 2006. The Tribunal onresumption of its work may decide the matter in accordance with law.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
_____________________
(Bilal Nazki, J)
3[rd] January, 2006
___________________
(S.Ananda Reddy,J)
vrn
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.