Jubilee Hills International Centre, vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, AP-I
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that a previous appeal arising from the same ITAT order had been allowed. Consequently, the present appeal was rendered infructuous.
What were the facts?
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against an ITAT order. The appellant's counsel submitted that a related appeal arising from the same ITAT order had already been allowed by the High Court.
What were the issues?
Whether the present appeal has become infructuous due to a prior judgment on a related matter.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 212 OF 2007 Appeal Under Section 260A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 02-02-2007 in M.P.No. 119 lHydl 2005 ( in ITA NO. 1135 lHyd / 04) on the file of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench -A, Hyderabad preferred against the order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals ) IV Hyderabad dated 29-10-2004 in Appeal No. 116 / ITO'6 (3) / CIT (A) -lV / 04-05 preferred against the order of the lncome Tax Officer , Ward - 6 (3) , Hyderabad dated 31-03-2004 in PAN/ GIR NO. J-601/ W'6 (3) Between: Jubilee Hills lnternational Centre, Road No.14, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND Commissioner of lncome Tax, AP-|, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI. CHALLA GUNARANJAN Counsel for the Respondent: SRI J. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court delivered the following: Judgment \ I , I i :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHTryAN AND THE SRI N. TUI{ARAMJI I.T.T.A.No.212 of 2QO7 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice tJjjat Bhugan) Heard Mr. Challa Gunaranjan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. J.v.Prasad, learned standing Counsel, Income Tax Department for the respondent. 2- This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 196r (briefly 'the Act'hereinafter), is directed against the order dated o2.o2.2oo7 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ,A,, Hyderabad, in M.P.No. l19 /Hyd/05 in I.T.A.No.1 135/Hyd/04 for the assessment year 2OO|-2OO2. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appeal under section 260A of the Act arising out of I.T.A.No. lt35/Hyd./2oo4, being I.T.T.A.No.2o5 of 2oos, I has been allowed by this court vide the judgment and : order dated 04.01.2023. In view thereof, this appeal i I I
2 4 arising out of the miscellaneous petition has become infructuous. 4 Accordingly, the appeal is dismissecl as infructuous. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shari be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. B.S. CHIRANJEEVI JOINISEGISTRAR sEcrffN oFFtcER To 1. The lncome tax Appellate Tribunar, Hyderabad Bench -A, Hyderabad 2- The commissioner of lncome Tax (Ap-peals ) lV Hyderabad " 3. The lncome Tax _Officer , Ward - 6 (3) , Hyderabad 4. One CC to SRt. CHALLA GUNARANJnT nOvocate [OpUC] 5. One CC to SRl. J V PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies \F I
It / HIGH COURT HCJ & NTRJ DATED: 04/01 12023 JUDGMENT lTTA.No.212 of 2007 DISMISSING THE ITTA AS TATFRUCTUOUS WIIIHOUT COSTS [ 3 ttB ?[?3 * -l( r-, $Trtrig lr-l { 23 \
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026