Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central vs. Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao

ITTA/21/2021HC TelanganaHBHC01036292202009 October 2023Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY5 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that consequential orders had been passed by the Assessing Officer on May 31, 2021, and that these orders were under further challenge by the Assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Given these subsequent developments, the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) prayed that the question of law raised in the appeals be left open to be considered in an appropriate case. Consequently, the High Court ordered that both appeals stand disposed of as not pressed. However, the question of law raised in the appeals was expressly left open to be considered and decided in an appropriate case. No costs were awarded. Any pending miscellaneous applications were closed.

What were the facts?

These appeals were filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'A', dated November 19, 2019. The appeals pertained to Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2011-12. The ITAT's order was preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, which in turn was against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-3, Hyderabad, dated March 31, 2013. Consequential orders were passed by the Assessing Officer on May 31, 2021, which are now under further challenge by the Assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the question of law raised in the appeals should be left open to be considered in an appropriate case. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the procedural disposition of the appeal). Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) prayed that the question of law raised in the appeals be left open to be considered in an appropriate case due to subsequent developments. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded. The judgment states that the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) made a submission.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

rN rHE HrGH "or*IfSIrtJ*=otJ#E oF TELANGANA MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER 'ffio riousnND AND TwENTYTHREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY [ 3386 ] ...Appellant ...Respondent AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEA L Nos: 21&23 ot 2O2'l l.T.T.A. No.21 ot 2021 Between: Floor, AaYakar Bhavan' lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260,4 of the lncome Tax Act' against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad Bench 'A" Hyderabad in ITA No.135B t{ydt2O19' for assessmenlYear 2011-12 dated 19-1 1- 2019 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-12' Hyderabad, Appeal No"10307t2017-18 daled 26-07-2019' preferred against the OrOer of rhe Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax Central Circle -3' Hyderabad' PAN/GIR No AAVPN8500E dated 31-03-2013' E::f; s3#;,Til1i,,1,".131f lr',io'330"-"'(centrar)'7'[h AND iii,I ise#:;l#t &1: tE^\:,fr3;3R136#i 1 2eA' Road N o 36' J ubiree Counsel for the Appellant: SRI K' MAMATA' SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT Counsel forthe Respondent: M/s' MN ADVOCATES

|.T.T.A.No.23 ol 2021 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act, against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad in ITA No.1358lHydl2019, for assessment Year 2009-10 dated 19-1 1- 2019 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, Appeal No. 1030312017-18 daled 26-07-2019, preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax Central Circle -3, Hyderabad, PAN/GlR No. AAVPNBS0OE dated 31-03-2013. Between: Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax (Central), 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad -500 004. ...Appellant AND Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao, H No. 8-2-2931821A11129A, Road No. 36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-s0O 033. [PAN: AAVPN8500E] ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI K. MAMATA, SC FOR lT DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent: M/s. MN ADVOCATES The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

\. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICD LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY I.T.T.A.Nos.2l &23 of 202L COMMON ORDER:(per uon'bte Sa,tustice p:sAM KoSHy) Heard Ms. K. Mamata, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing. for the appellant and perused the record. 2. These appeals have been hled assailing the order dated 19.11.2O19 passed in I.T.A.Nos.1356 & 1358/Hydl2Ot9 for the Assessment Years 20O9-1O & 2011-12 on the frle of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A,, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the TribunalJ pending consideration of the appeal before this Court. 3. The Assessing Ofhcer has in fact passed consequential orders on 3I.O5.2O21. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the said order is under further chailenge by the Assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeal]. 4. In view of the developments that have been transpired in between, learned counsel for the appellant at this juncture prays that the question of law raised in the appeals be left open to be considered in an appropriate case. 5. Given the said submissior-rs, both the appeals stalds disposed of as not pressed. However, the question of iaw raised in ) . il.,rri r . ,':] ' :1,1{: /

..7- 2 PSK.J & LNAJ I T.T.A.No.21 e$ 23 of 2O2l the appeals 1S left open to be considered and decided in an appropriate case. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- M. VIJAYA BHASKER JOINT REGISTRAR ,.-c?I) SECTION OFFICER' To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench '8" Hyderabad 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-12' Hyderabad' 3. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax Central Circle -3' Hyderabad 4. One CC to SRI K. MAMATA, SC for lT DEPARTMENT [OPUC] 5. One CC to M/s. I\4N ADVOCATES, Advocates [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies \ kam \A'. VII

HIGH COURT DATED:0911012023 COMMON ORDER lTTA.No.21 & 23 o12021 DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS 1b l { I Nu\ 1t8 2j t I STATE clo t cEsPnI

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →