Wp/40888/2017 Of Pathi Madhusudhan Rao v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
11 Dec 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/40888/2017 Of Pathi Madhusudhan Rao v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
11 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/40888/2017 Of Pathi Madhusudhan Rao v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD
W.P.No.40888 of 2017
Date: 11.12.2017
Between:
Pathi Madhusudhan Rao S/o.late Narayana, Aged about 51 years, Occ: business, R/o.11-4-646, 512-D-Wing, Vijay Vijaya Hill, AC Guards, Khairtabad, Hyderabad. Telangana State … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Income Tax, ‘A’ block Income Tax Towers, 10-2-3, A.C.Guards, Masab Tank, … Hyderabad and another Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.G.G.V.Gopala Krishna : Counsel for the Respondents Mr.K.Raji Reddy Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department
The Court made the following:
CVNR,J & TA, J W.P.No.40888 of 2017 Date: 11.12.2017
Order : (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside assessment order dated 13.06.2017, passed by respondent No.1.
2. We have heard Mr.G.G.V.Gopala Krishna, counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Raji Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department.
3. Though the petitioner has not pleaded that against the impugned assessment order, appeal has been filed, he has however, filed a copy of form No.35, showing that he has filed the appeal before respondent No.2 and the same was received by the latter’s office on 04.08.2017. As the petitioner has already availed the effective alternative remedy, he is not entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed on this short ground, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to pursue the pending appeal.
5. As a sequel to the dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.50772 of 2017, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is dismissed as infructuous.
______________________
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)
_____________________
(T.Amarnath Goud, J)
CVNR,J & TA, J W.P.No.40888 of 2017 Date: 11.12.2017
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.