Case LawHigh Court › Wp/5827/2009 Of Yeturu Bio Tech Limited,...

Wp/5827/2009 Of Yeturu Bio Tech Limited, Yeturu 843, Banjara Avenue v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii

High Court 21 Apr 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/5827/2009 Of Yeturu Bio Tech Limited, Yeturu 843, Banjara Avenue v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii
Date of order
21 Apr 2009
Assessment year(s)
2006-07
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp/5827/2009 Of Yeturu Bio Tech Limited, Yeturu 843, Banjara Avenue v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iii, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.

Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with no orderas to costs. ___________________ ANIL R.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRILTWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENTTHE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 5827 of 2009 Between: Yeturu Bio Tech Limited, "Yeturu" 843, Banjara Avenue, BanjaraHills, Hyderabad, A.P. represented by its Managing Director, Y.Sirish Reddy S/o.Y. Ramachandra Reddy aged29 years. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Income Tax-III Hyderabad. 2 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3(3), Hyderabad. 3 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to to issue a writ, order or direction one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking coercivesteps for the recovery of a sum of Rs.2,05,90,220/- pending disposal ofappeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- IV, Hyderabadfor the Assessment Year 2006-07 as bad in law, arbitrary and violative ofArt. 14 of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the noticedated 27.02.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent, Dy. Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Circle-3(3), Hyderabad, U/Sec. 226(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.V.KRISHNA KOUNDINYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.N.SARMA The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5827 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submittedthat during the pendency of the writ petition, he has been affordedsome protection by the respondent – authorities and therefore seekspermission to withdraw the petition. The writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with no orderas to costs. ___________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 21[st] April, 2009asp _____________________________RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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