M/s. Emeskay Financials vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. This means the appellant failed to appear or present their case before the court.
What were the facts?
The appellant, M/s. Emeskay Financial, filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Income Tax Tribunal. The appeal was listed in the weekly cause list for hearing.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the appellant's failure to prosecute their appeal, leading to its dismissal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
h IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. RAVINDRA BABU INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No. 178 of 2007 Appeal under Section 260(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam dated 06/09/2006 passed in IT. (SS) A.No. 79/Vizag/2002 for the block period 20/06/1995 to 14/10/1998 preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-1), Hyderabad dated 27/02/2002 passed in Appeal No.36A/JA/CIT(A)-l/01-02 for the block period 1996-97 1998-99 ending 14/10/1998 preferred against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada passed in PAN/GIR No. E-302, dated 21/03/2001 for the block period 1996-97 to 1998-99 14/10/1998. to ending Between: M/s. Emeskay Financial, 1®* Floor, Vasanth Plaza, Benz Circle, Vijayawada. ...Appellant AND
4 DCIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya (NP) Counsel for the Respondent: Sri A. Radha Krishna The Court made the following:
i tt THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.RAVINDRA BABU INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No. 178 OF 2007 JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) No representation for the appellant. 2. Sri A. Radha Krishna, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax for the respondent appears through virtual mode. 3. The matter is in the weekly cause list. The Income Tax Tribunal Appeal is dismissed for 4. want of prosecution. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending. shall also stand closed. SD/- P VENKATA RAMANA JOINT REGISTRAR to //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Chairman, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-1), Hyderabad. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada, Krishna District. V ' 4. One CC to Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya, Advocate, High Court of AP, " Amaravati (OPUC) 5. One CC to Sri A. Radha Krishna, Advocate, High Court of A.P., Amaravathi [OPUC] 6. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of A.P.at Amaravathi. 7. Three CD Copies. MSR sree
-7 <»»• HIGH COURT DATED:07/12/2023 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.178 of 2007 DISMISSING THE I.T.TA. FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS
More judgments on Section 260(A)
- Rijwan vs Income Tax OfficerITA/3/202023 Sept 2026
- Manoj Gupta vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)…ITA/243/202618 Sept 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs Income Tax Officer, JammuITA/20/20142 Apr 2026
- Late Shri Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar vs The Income Tax OfficerITA/16/202526 Feb 2026
- Shri K. Samba Siva Rao ( HUF), Hyd vs I.T.O., HydITTA/181/20109 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026