Wp/7570/2009 Of Vanaja Finance v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
20 Sep 2010 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/7570/2009 Of Vanaja Finance v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
20 Sep 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp/7570/2009 Of Vanaja Finance v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court towithdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedyin law.Giving liberty to do so, the writ petition is dismissed aswithdrawn.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAOAND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION No.7570 of 2009Dated:20.09.2010
Between:
Vanaja Finance.
…Petitioner
and
The Income Tax Officer,Ward-2, Ongole, Prakasam District,And others.
…Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAOAND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION No.7570 of 2009
ORDER:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao)
The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction of the thirdrespondent, namely, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi,in disposing of the petitioner’s application for waiver of interestunder Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. At the preliminary stage itself, the Senior Standing Counsel forIncome Tax has placed before this Court the communicationbearing No.F.400/1/2004-IT(B), dated 28.01.2004, addressed to thepetitioner declining the waiver of interest.
Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court towithdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedyin law.Giving liberty to do so, the writ petition is dismissed aswithdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
20.09.2010vs
______________________________
(RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J)
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.
EaseValue