G.RAMANLAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/359/2008HC TelanganaHBHC01005176200812 August 2021Bench: SHAMEEM AKTHER,A.RAJASHEKER REDDY3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with no costs awarded.

What were the facts?

The appellant, G. Ramanlal, filed an appeal before the High Court. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal to avail benefits under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appellant could withdraw the appeal to avail benefits under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY ANO THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 3s9 0F 2008 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260 of the lncome Tax Act, against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad in lTA.No.994/Hyd12007 (Hyderabad 'A' Bench), for assessment year 2001-2002 dated 29.08.2008 reached by Appellant on 02.09.2008 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax Appeals-Vl Hyderabad, Appeal No.0"163/06- 07/lTOMd.1 1( )/Hyd/ClT(A)-Vl-2007-2008, preferred against the Order of the lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1 1 (4), Hyderabad PAN/GlR No. ACWPG4404E dated 31.03.2001. Between: G. Ramanlal, Prop: Balaji Jewellers, Olo.748, AS Rao Nagar, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI C. V. NARASIMHAM Counsel forthe Respondent: SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 11 [4], Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Gaurds, Hyderabad

HONOUR,.\BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY AND HOI\Ot RABLE DT.JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHEIl l.T.T.A. No.359 OF 2008 J UDGM E NT ': I l'ct Hon'bte Sti Justice a. Rajasheker Red.rdy) Learned counsel for the appellant has a filed a letter seeking withdrawal of this appeal on the ground that the appellant wishes to avail the benetlts under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, introduced by the Central Government. 2. In that view of the matter, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. 3. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed //TRUE COPY' 1. The Chairman, income Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad 'A' Bench, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax Appeals-Vl, 3'd floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 3. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 11 [4], lT Towers, AC Gaurds, Hyderabad 4. One CC to Sri C. V. Narasimham, Advocate IOPUC] 5. One CC to Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies 7. One Spare Copy gbt-. cf Sd/. K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR t 1{. SECTION OFFICER To,

HIGH COURT DATED: 1210812021 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.359 of 2008 DISMISSING THE APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN t f S -\ 21 G AIJ 5 2 ll t: 2C , ,?- (, -!. .lo D .2:+ \D t_\ i .16

More judgments on Section 260

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →