What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the appellants (assessees) were not represented by counsel for several hearings. Consequently, the court concluded that the assessees were not interested in pursuing the appeals. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed for want of prosecution.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had passed orders in two appeals, ITA Nos. 10771/HYD/2004 and 873/HYD/2008. The present case involves appeals filed before the High Court against these ITAT orders. The appeals have been listed for dismissal on previous occasions.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeals should be dismissed due to the non-appearance of the appellants' counsel and lack of representation, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the case.

Smt. V.Jyothi vs Asst. Comnmisisoner of IncomeTax | Telangana High Court 2025

'213447l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH 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 Nos.36 AND 47 0F 2009 INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 36 0F 2009 lncomeTaxTribunalAppealUnderSection2604ofthelncomeTaxAct,,l96.l ,grin.i G ord.r dated 19_1'2_2008 passed in tTA No. 10771HYD12004 for the n".."..r"nt year 2001_2002 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'B', HYderabad Between: Smt. V.JYot Hyderabad - hi, 8-3-966/19, Nagarjuna 500 082. AND Assistant Comnmisisoner of lncomeTax' Circle-6 [1] Hyderabad Nagar ColonY, YellareddYguda, ...Appellant ...Respondent INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 47 OF 2009 lncomeTaxTribunalAppealUnderSection2604ofthelncomeTaxACt,l96,i againsi the order aatea zd-oz-2009 passed in tTA No.873iHYD/2008 for the n"r."."r""^t year 2004-2005 on the fiie of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench'B', HYderabad. Between: KhorshedShapoorChenai,s-g-22tl,Shapoorwadi'Adarshnagar'Hyderabad- 500082 ...Appellant AND Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Cricle - 5 [1] ' Hyderabad ...Respondent i I I I I i I I l I I I I i 1 I I I i l I I I I

Counsel for the Appellants in both ITTAs Counsel for the Respondent in both ITTAs :Sri P Murali Krii;hna (Not Present) :Sri J V Prasarl (Sr. SC for lnr:ome l[ax) The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA I.T.T.A.Nos.36 8b 47 OF 2OO9 COMMON JUDGMENT To, Two CD CoPies (per Hatl'ble Sn Justice P.Sq.m Koshlj) For the last couple of hearing, these matters are posted under the caption 'for dismissal', however, on some ground or the other, the earlier counsel had been taking time to seek appropriate instructions from the assessee and to file fresh vakalat. 2. It appears that the assessee perhaps is not interested in pursuing these appeals and that is the reason no fresh vakalat has been hled, neither is there any duly engaged counsel representing the SSESSCC. 3. On the ground that the appellalts are not being represented for many occasions, this Bench is left with no other option but to dismiss these appeals for w,ant of prosecution. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed for non- prosecution. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed ,/TRUE COPY'/ '.,-* ?'[+*Alt?$[lR secrh#rrrcen 1. 2 J 4 ff:sf *ii:$f,:liH,'.sliE:lfgi{e"":r-'l"l***'o ADK/PSL (A- \

HIGH COURT DATED:2710312025 \3 / DISMISSING THE BOTH ITTA s FOR NON.PROSEUCTION 8e .,,i COMMON JUDGMENT lTTA.Nos.36 and 47 ot 2009 16 sEp A6 ; ;.:) t' : '+* I)1 6

Smt. V.Jyothi vs. Asst. Comnmisisoner of IncomeTax

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments