DR. S. SURENDRANATH REDDY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 4 [1] HYDERABAD.

ITTA/90/2010HC TelanganaHBHC01019076201017 February 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the communication from the appellant assessee. The assessee stated that they have discharged the liability and no longer wish to pursue the appeal. Based on this submission, the High Court found no reason to proceed with the appeal on merits. The Tribunal held that the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. There was no order as to costs. Consequently, any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed. The High Court did not decide any substantive issue related to the income tax assessment itself, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground based on the assessee's request.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dr. S. Surendranath Reddy, proprietor of Vijaya Diagnostic Center, filed an appeal before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad. This appeal was filed under Section 260(4) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated 06-02-2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad Bench 'B'. The ITAT's order was in relation to ITA No. 1491/Hyd/2008 for the assessment year 2004-2005. This ITAT order, in turn, was preferred against an order dated 31-07-2008 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad, which had dealt with an appeal against an order dated 18-12-2006 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. The dispute pertains to the assessment of the assessee under PAN/GIR No. AGQPS3104F.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is to be dismissed as withdrawn, considering the communication from the appellant stating that the liability has been discharged and they do not intend to pursue the appeal further pending before the High Court? (Question of procedure/settlement). Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the appellant brought to the notice of the Bench a communication from the appellant stating that pending the appeal, they have discharged the liability and do not intend to pursue the appeal any further. Revenue's Contention: None appeared for the respondent (Revenue). The judgment records no argument for the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

260(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

13447 | IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Appeal filed under Section 260(4) of the Income-Tax Act., 1961, against the order dated 06-02-2009 passed !n lTA.No.1491/Hydl2008 for the assessment year 2004-2005 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad. Bench 'B' Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 31-07-2008 passed in lTA.No.303/AC- 4(1YCff( )-Vf2006-07 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 18-12-2006 passed in PAN/GIR No. AGQPS3104F on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad. Between: Dr. S. Surendranath Reddy, Prop. M/s. Vijaya Diagnostic Center, 3-6-20, Tirumala Apartments, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. ...Appellant AND Dy. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle - 4 (1), Hyderabad ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Srinarayan Toshniwal, counsel representing Mr. A.V. Krishna Koundinya Counsel for the Respondent: None Appeared The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 90 of 2010 I

7 THE HONOURABLE SR] JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABI,E SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA ITTA No.90 OF 2010 JUI)GMENT (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr. Srinarayan Toshniwal, leamed counsel representing Mr. A.V.Krishna Koundinya, learned counsel for the appellant. Perused the record 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has today brought to the notice of the Bench a communication tiom the appellant stating that pending appeal, they have discharged the liability and they do not intend to pursue the appeal any further. 3. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any. shatl stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR 'I , SECTION OFFICER To, 1. 2. 4. 5. Kanrl The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'B' Hyderabad The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-V, Hyderabad. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad. One CC to Mr. A.V. Krishna Koundinya, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies gh Yx

-t HIGH COURT DATED:1710212025 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.90 of 2010 THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN oo t) r\ 1 r-r.E S tar{. 03 APff zffi u.-O Y\- (5\z*-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →