M/S. vs. T INDUSTRIES LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the tax amount due has been paid by the appellant. Consequently, the appeal has become infructuous.
What were the facts?
The appellant, M/s. VST Industries Limited, filed an appeal before the High Court. The appellant's counsel submitted that the tax amount due has already been paid.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to the payment of the tax amount.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Appeal Under Section 260-A of the lncome Tax Act,1961 Against The O1d91Of lncome Tax Appetlate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench - A Hyderabad in l.T.A.No. 1067 I Hydl 2022 dated 21-07-zoos for Assessment year 1999-2000 preferred against the order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) lV , Hyderabad dated 25-10-2002 in Appeat No. 98 / AC -3 (3) / CtT (A) _iV I ZOOZ_OI preferred against the order of the Asst. commissioner of lncome Tax, circle -3 (3) , Hyderabad dated 28-03-2002 in PAN / GtR No. AAACV6799C/ V-33 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN ANt) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO:277 OF 2005 ...APPELLANT/ Appellant Between: M/S. VST INDUSTRIES LIMITED, rep. by its Director and Seoretary Sri N Sankar 1-7-1063/1065, Azamabad, Hydera6ad - 500 020. Sai AND Asst. . Commissioner Of lnco_me T-ax, Hyderabad, Circle 3(3), Ayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - S0O 001. ...neSp'OrubENriiesfonaent Counsel for the Appettant: SRI p. RAJENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA The Court delivered the following: Judgment \
BHIIYAN 3. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed infructuous. THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAI- AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTIC E C.V REDDY JUDGMENT: (Per the Hotble the Chief Justice llral Bhugan) Heard Mr. P.Rajender Reddy, learned counsel lor the appellant. 2. Learned counsel lor the appellant submits that the tax amount due has already been paid by the appellant. Therefore, the appeal has become infructuous. AS Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.. SD/. B.S,CHIRANJEEVI ,rRUE coPYtt 'o'*'.ltfTll.l To, sEcTtoN oFHCER 1. The lncome Tax Aooellate Tribjrnal, -Hyderabad Bench _ A Hyderabad 2 rhe commissionei of tncome r;;i'Apir;;i;lii , nyaeraoao 3. The Asst. Commissioner. o_f lncome fbi, Ciici"'_g (3) , Hyderabad 4. one CC to sRt. p. RAJENDER-RiDiji, ;il;;l'"i" topuct 5. one CC to SRt. B. NARASIMAn sn-nrviA, XjiJIr't" topuc: 6. Two CD Copies I.T.T.A.No.277 of 2OOS
HIGH COURT DATED:0710912022 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.277 of 2005 DISMISSING THE ITTA AS INFRUCTUOUS r 0,: 'r 'i li tu I I t/
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 →- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026