Case LawHigh Court › Wp/39087/2012 Of Chief Accounts Offr, M/...

Wp/39087/2012 Of Chief Accounts Offr, M/S Vuda, Visakhapatnam v. Asst Commr Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam & Anr

High Court 03 Jul 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · aphc
Parties
Wp/39087/2012 Of Chief Accounts Offr, M/S Vuda, Visakhapatnam v. Asst Commr Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam & Anr
Date of order
03 Jul 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Wp/39087/2012 Of Chief Accounts Offr, M/S Vuda, Visakhapatnam v. Asst Commr Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam & Anr, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non–prosecution.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

APHC010022922012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3526] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAOWRIT PETITION No.39087 of 2012 Between: M/s.Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, 3[rd] Floor, VUDA Complex, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam – 530 003, Rep. by its Chief Accounts Officer, Smt.D.Vijaya Bharathi. … Petitioner AND Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam, Circle–1(1), 4[th] Floor, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530 017, and another. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.Ch.Pushyam Kiran Counsel for the Respondents : Mr.Vijay Kumar Punna This Court delivered the followingORDER: (per NJS,J) Though the matter is listed under the caption “For Dismissal”, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Even on 20.6.2025 also, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the writ petition. 2. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non–prosecution. No order 2. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non–prosecution. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J ____________________________ TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO,J
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan