Wp/7652/2010 Of Ragidi Laxma Reddy v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vi
High Court
08 Apr 2010 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/7652/2010 Of Ragidi Laxma Reddy v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vi
Date of order
08 Apr 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp/7652/2010 Of Ragidi Laxma Reddy v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vi, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
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)
THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRILTWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARIAND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.7 6 5 2 of 2010
Between :
Ragidi Laxma Reddy s/o R Prabhu ReddyAged about 44 years, Occ. Business,R/o Plot No.1, Green Hills Colony,Street No.8, Habsiguda, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER
V/s.
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-VI)6[th] Floor, I.T. Towers, AC Guards,Hyderabad & Anr. ..... RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri M. Narender Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents: Govt.Pleader for Commercial Tax
The Division Bench of thisCourt made the following : (Order follows 2[nd] page)
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANARAO
WRIT PETITION No. 7 6 5 2 of 2010
ORALORDER : { Per the Hon’ble Smt.Justice T.Meenakumari }
The writ petition has been filed seeking mandamus todeclare the action of the respondents in proceeding to recover theamount under the assessment order dated 31-12-2009 for theassessment year 2007-08 during the pendency of the appeal beforethe first respondent as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 ofthe Constitution of India and to pass such other suitable orders as thisCourt may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. When the matter came up today, the learned counsel for thepetitioner seeks leave of this Court to withdraw this writ petition with aleave to avail such remedies as may be available to the petitioner inlaw.
3.Leave is accordingly granted.
4. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. It isneedless to observe that if the petitioner avails any such remedy, thesame shall be considered on its own merits uninfluenced by thedismissal of this writ petition.
_____________________
Justice T.Meena Kumari
___________________________________
Justice Nooty
Ramamohana Rao
08-4-2010.I s L
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARIANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOORTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 7 6 5 2 OF 2010 Judgment of the Division Bench delivered bythe Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari)
Circulation Entry No.6 2Date: 08-04-2010COMPUTER No. 43Court Master: I s L
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.