Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Limited, vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Cirlce 2(3),

ITTA/420/2010HC TelanganaHBHC01020228201017 February 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The Court noted that on the previous date of hearing, the matter was un-attended, and on the current date, despite repeated calls, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant. This led the Court to conclude that the appellant had lost interest in the litigation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also ordered to stand closed.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Limited against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'. The Tribunal's order, dated 04.11.2005, was for assessment year 2002-2003. This appeal was preferred against an order dated 15.12.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Hyderabad, which in turn was against an assessment order dated 14.03.2005 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. The appellant's counsel was Mr. D. Pavan Kumar. The matter was listed for hearing on multiple dates. On a previous date, the matter was left unattended. On the current date of hearing, despite repeated calls, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution, given the absence of representation from the appellant. The appellant's counsel, Mr. D. Pavan Kumar, was not present. On the previous date of hearing, the matter was left un-attended. On the current date, despite repeated calls, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, leading the Court to infer that the appellant had lost interest in the litigation. The respondent was represented by Sri P. Murali Krishna.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

260(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P,SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 420OF 2010 Appeal fited under Section 260(4) of the lncome-Tax Act., i961, against the order dated 04.11.2005 passed in lTA,No 872lHydl2006 lor the assessment year 2002-2003 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench ,A, Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 15.12.2005 passed in lTA. No. 340lACl2(3)lClT(A)-lll/05-06 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-lll, Hyderabad preferred against the Assessment Order dated 14.03.200s passed in PAN/GIR No, AAACT8B490 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner of . lncome Tax, Circle- 3(3), Hyderabad. Between: Andhra_Pradesh Paper Mills Limited, 501-509, Swapnalok Complex, g2l93, S.D. Road, Secunderabad-SOO 003 Rep. by its Director Shreeyash B'angur, S/o. L.N. Bangur, Aged 29 years, resident of Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND Assistant Commissioner of lncometax Circle 2(3),, Hyderabad Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. D. Pavan Kumar (Not present) Counsel for the Respondent : Sri P. Murali Krishna The Court delivered the following: ...RESPONDENT nj . . .3; I I

I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BI,E SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No.42O OF 2OIO JUDGMENT | fuer i* n'bLe Sn Juslice Psam Koshy.) Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms.Sagarika Koneru, learned counsel appearing under the instructions of Mr.D.Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant informed the Bench that the appellant has obtained NOC and brief from their office. 2. On the previous date of hearing, the matter left un-attended by either in person or by duly engaged counsel. 3. Today alsb, inspite of repeated calls, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. It appears that the appellant has lost interest in the litigation. 4. In view of the same, this Bench is left with no other option, but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed for non prosecution. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/. K. SRINIVASA RAO NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/' fr.(T' \SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad' 2. The Commissionet ";;;";;iax (nbpeats)-tll Hvderabad' 3. The Assistant corn''ttiin'";i l";# Tax circle- 3(3)' Hyderabad' ;. il b;;Mr. D Pavan Kumar' Advocate !9!ycr ;'iliii"s,iP,tVluraliKrishna,Advocate[oPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies r I I t DL/sh @* I I i \--.-- \

HIGH COURT DATED:1710212O25 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.420 of 2010 APPEAL IS DISMISiSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION i I l 't d;"1' r. A- I'lAR 2025 Dr'-. .. ' 16: T S A a $ 1 Jc I ? o I Qt i

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →