International Education Academy, vs. Dy. Director of Income Tax [E] III,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the subject matter of the appeal had become infructuous and that the appellant did not want to press the appeal any further. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal as having become infructuous. There was no order as to costs. All pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.
What were the facts?
The appellant, International Education Academy, Hyderabad, filed an Income Tax Tribunal Appeal No. 150 of 2010 before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. This appeal was against an order dated 8.9.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad A-Bench, in ITA Nos. 4941/Hyd/2007 & 518/Hyd/2007, pertaining to Assessment Years 2002-03 and 2004-05. The respondent was the Dy. Director of Income Tax [E] III, Hyderabad. The appeal was heard on August 11, 2025.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeal filed by the appellant has become infructuous, and if so, what is the consequence? (Question of fact and law) The appellant, through its counsel, submitted that the subject matter of the appeal had become infructuous and that they did not wish to press the appeal further. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 against the order dated 8.9-2008 passed in ITA No. 4941 l1ydl2007 & 518 tiydt2111 for the Assessment Year 2OO2-03 and 2004-05 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad A-Bench , Hyderabad. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 150 OF 2010 Between: tnternational Education Academy, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND Dy. Director of lncome Tax [E] lll, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. SAGARTKA KONERU representing SRI Y. RATNAKAR Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI J. V. PRASAD (Sr. SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court delivered the following Judgment :
JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri .Ju.stice p.Sunt Koshy) Ms. Sagarika Koneru. leamecl counsel t-,presenring Mr. Y.Ratnakar, leamed counsel for the appellant. s rbmits that the subject matter has since become infructuous and ; rc does not want to press the appeal any further. 2. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed as ha,, ns become infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending., i , anv, shall stand closed. SdI- 1 KRISHNA KUMAR JOINT REGISTRAR SBCTION OFFICER kul/PSL I I I I I I i I ll THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM K0 iHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUI)DALA CHAI,, ,,{THI RAo I.T.T.A.No.l5O of 20I0 To, //TRUE COPY// 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad A-Benc t , Hyderabad' 2. One CC to SRl. Y. RATNAKAR, Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC to SRt. J. \1. PRASAD (Sr. SC FOR INCOME Tl X) IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies V^-
HIGH COURT DISMISSING THE APPEAT, WITHOUT COSTS G."fl"L A r a'r tad i J bi.'. i:t ;\ / '\:1 tr t DATED:11/08/2025 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.150 of 2010
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Deepak Kumar Daiya vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 4 Nov 2026
- Pawan Kumar Rajgaria vs. State Of West BengalCalcutta · 4 Nov 2026
- Mohammed Fazil vs. State Of ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh · 4 Nov 2026
- Tvl. Devaerakkam Mercy Mary vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 4 Nov 2026
- Procter And Gamble Health LTD vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 4 Nov 2026