THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-IV vs. M/S MATRIX LABORATORIES LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/457/2015HC TelanganaHBHC01043548201512 November 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Telangana, upon hearing the submission from the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department that nothing further remained for adjudication and the matter had become infructuous, dismissed the appeal. The reasoning is solely based on the appellant's counsel's statement that the appeal is no longer maintainable on merits. The Court ordered no costs. The ratio decidendi is that an appeal, when acknowledged as infructuous by the appellant, is to be dismissed on that procedural basis. No specific findings on the merits of the original assessment or the Tribunal's order were made, as the appeal was not adjudicated on its substance.

What were the facts?

This case involves an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax-IV, Hyderabad, against an order dated 02-07-2012 passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'B', Hyderabad. The appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2003-04. The respondent in this appeal is Hi-Tech Stories Ltd. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court of Telangana was hearing this appeal. The counsel for the appellant (Income Tax Department) submitted that nothing further remained for adjudication in the present appeal, and the matter had become infructuous.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal has become infructuous, requiring dismissal. (Question of fact and law) Assessee's Contention: The counsel for the Income Tax Department (appellant) submitted that the matter had become infructuous and nothing further remained for adjudication. This implies an argument that the appeal should be dismissed on this procedural ground. Revenue's Contention: No specific contention is recorded for the revenue (respondent) in the judgment. The judgment only records the submission of the appellant's counsel.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

rN rHE HrcH "or*If3$or#lBlfrE oF TELANGANA WEDNESDAY, I rwoitu#,:Iffiuf^1,#,trI^i,i,T?v[EMBER [ 348s ] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIC E P,SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO Appeal und dated 02-07_2012 Appellate fribunal, Between AND er section 260A of the rncome Tax Act, 1g61 against order in rrA'No: g39tHydt2o10 0n the f,e of the rncome-Tax Bench 'B', Hyderabad for the Assessment year 2OO3_04. { The Commissioner of tncome_Tax_tV, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT Hi:"H1t:5-r'#f{?tories Ltd, Ptot No.56 4tN22, Road No.e2, Jubiree Hiss, ... RESPONDENT/APPELLANT Counsel for the Appellant: Sri K. Sudhakar Reddy ' (Sr. Standing Counsel for tncome Tax) counsel for the Respondent: Sri santosh Sagar Kapiravai The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

trl I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P'SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO I.T'T'A'No'457 of 2015 JUDGMENT : (per Hon'ble Sri Jusfice P'Sam Koshy) Mr. K' Sudhakar Reddy' learned Senior Standing Counsel forlncomeTaxDepartment,submitsthatnothingfurtherremains for adjudication in the present appeal and the matter has thus become infructuous' 2. In view of the said submission' the appeal stands dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs' Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed. SD'. N.SRIHARI UTY REGI /TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER 1. The lncome-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench '8" Hyderabad' 2. One CC to Sri K. Sudhakar Reddy (Sr Standing Counsel for lncome Tax) loPUCl To, y : i:::::T,:"r,,tosh sasa r Kapitavai, Advocate topucl -t' vH/psL

, HIGH COURT DATED: 1211112025 JUDGMENT |TTA.No.4S7 of 2015 DISMISSING THE ITTA AS INFRUCTUOUS ."/--': ,,;i"iil i. n ,.,1 r.' -):,. '\\ n \0 1 6 JAll 2026 () -rr J

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →