CTR - RAILONE JV vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - III

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/285/2013HC TelanganaHBHC01062610201323 June 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The appellant's counsel submitted that in view of another related appeal being allowed, they did not wish to press the instant appeal. The High Court recorded this submission and disposed of the appeal as 'not pressed'.

What were the facts?

The appellant, CTR - RAILONE JV, filed an appeal before the High Court against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2009-10.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal should be pressed further by the appellant. The appellant chose not to press the appeal based on a related ITAT order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Between: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDER BAD MONDAY, THE TWENry IRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AN TWENry FIVE PRESE T THE HONOURABLE SRI JU TICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL AP EAL NO: 285 OF 2013 e lncome Tax Act, 1 961 , aggrieved Appeal filed under Section 260-A of by the Orders dated 3'l .12.2012 of the lnco Hyderabad passed in lTA.No,1 114lHYDl20 Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) - 243llT06(3)icit9A)-iv/201 1-12 for the asses e Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'A', 2, preferred against the order of the V, Hyderabad d1.21 .5. 2012 in ffA ment year 2009-10 CTR - RAILONE JV, G-3, 8-2-693/ to '14, Road No.12, Banjarahills, its Authorised Signatory, Mr.K.Koti ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT HAN REP BY SRI G V N HARI EDDY, Standing Counsel 2 Hyderbad - 500 034, Represented b Reddy, S/o Sesha Reddy. AND COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - II , Hyd Counsel for the Appellant : SRI D.MANM Counsel for the Respondents: B. SAPNA The Court made the following: ORDER

.THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No.285 OF 2013 JUDGMENT per tlte Hon ble Sn Justtce l'.San Koshyl Heard Mr. Durrdu Manmohan, leamed counse[, reprcsenting Mr. G.V.N. Hari, learned counsel lor the appellant, and Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department for the respondent. 2. Learned counsel fbr the appcllant submits that in view of the Income Tax Tribunal Appeal No.496 of 201-i being allowed todal', vide order dated 23.06.2025, he doc-s not intend to press the instant appeal any furlher-. l{e, therefore, pral,ed that the appeal may be disposed ofas "not pressed" 3. Recording the aforesaid subnrission made by the learned counsel lor the appellant, the instant appeal stands disposed ofas "not pressed". 4. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if an1,, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- B. SATYAVATHI JOINT REGISTRAR \r l, SECTION OFFICER To, t. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench 'A', Hyderabad

2 3 4 A \ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ( One CC to B. Sapna Reddy, Standing One CC to Sri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate I Two CD Copies ABK ppeals) - lV, Hyderabad ounsel, High Court, HYD. [OPUC] PUCI

HIGH COURT DATED:2310612025 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.285 of 2013 i\i 12 r\JB 10fi I I / t,'!.s -,.. ri: DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL >. t(-U\

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →