MR R.JAGADISH REDDY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal if the dispute was not satisfactorily resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.
What were the facts?
The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal before the High Court. This was because the appellant had applied to the Central Board of Direct Taxes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, and their application was approved.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the appellant's participation in the Vivad se Vishwas scheme.
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 TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 260 of the lncome Tax Act, against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad in lTA.No.1419/HYD12011 for Assessment Year 2005-06 dated 13.05.2016 preferred against the Order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax Appeals Hyderabad, Appeal No.1225, 1227,1228 & 1229109-10 dated 28.04.201 1, preferred against the Order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Tax-2 PAN/GlR No. AAGHR 0701 M daled 29.12.2009. 1. Ir/r. R.Jagadish Reddy, (died) per LRs 2 to 5 Flat No.207, Ashoka Ornata Apartments, Street, No.2, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad. 2. Smt Redreddy Vinodhi, W/o.late Sri R.Jagadish Reddy, aged about 7'1 years, 3-6-547-1, Street No.7, Opposite Minerva Hotel, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad - 500029, Telangana 3. Smt Redreddy Haritha, W/o.Sri Srinivas Haridas, aged about 48 years, 58-21-22, Sita Ramaraju Nagar colony, Butchirajupalem, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam- 530027, Andhra Pradesh, presently residing at USA. 4. Smt Smitha, W/o.Sri Trilok Pratap Singh Bhandari, aged about 45 years, A-812, First Avenue, Near AFOCHS Colony, Sainikpuri, Hyderabad-500094, Telangana. 5. Smt Redreddy Swetha, W/o.Sri Pulakurthi Deepak Kumar, aged about 43 years, 8-2-3101B.1121201, Anantha Residency, 12, Navodaya Colony, Road No.14, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034, Telangana. Presently residing at USA. (Appellants No.2 to 5 are brought on record as per LR's of deceased Appellant No.1 as per Court Order dated 2010712021 in lA 112021) ,ELLANT/A,'ELLANT AND Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad. .RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A. V. A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondents: --- The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 532 OF 2016 Between:
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDTTA RAO ANI) HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR I.T.T.A. No.532 of 2 l6 JT, DGMENT: (Per Sri Justice M.S.Ramachandra Roo) The counsel for appellant has ftled a letter dr.16.07.2021 seeking to withdraw the Appeal stating that the appellant has made an application to the Central Board of Direct Taxes under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020,, and that Form - 3 had been issued by the designated authority approving the application made by the assessee. 2. Having regard to the said subrnission, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal with liberty to revive it in the event there is no satisfactory resolution of the dispute between the parties under the said Act. 3. Granting liberly as sought, the Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. 4, As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Appeal, shall stand closed. Sd/. K.I}RINIVASA RAO JO NT REGISTRAR Note: Amended the cause title as per the endorsement of the Reqistrar Judicial-l on the letter submitted by the counsel for the appellant, dated 14togl2o21. This substitutes the earlier CT which was dispatched on 0310812021. sd/-K.sRtNlvASA RAo JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/| 5, < SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B', Hyderabad' 2. One CC to Sri A. V. A. Siva Kartikeya Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies 4. One Spare CoPY gbr lA\F I l
DATED: 2010712021 DATED: 2010912021 AMENDED JUDGMENT ITTA.No.532 of 2016 DISMISSING THE ITTA AS WITHDRAWN \r. x- o UJ v HIGH COURT At., t )4 \'.:., ' (.4 1 :.\ iv s $" .$" c.., I +sx
More judgments on Section 260
- Kuldip Kohi, West Delhi vs ITO Ward 45(1), DelhiITA 7358/DEL/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Birla Furukawa Fibre Optics Private… vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income…ITA 178/PAN/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed7 Aug 2026AY 2021-22
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Pratyaksh Apparels Private Limited, DelhiITA 8054/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Jul 2026AY 2016-17
- Syds Hotels & Resorts Private Limited, Delhi vs ITO, Ward 22(4), DelhiITA 1782/DEL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed10 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
- Rani Promoter Private Limited, Delhi vs Jao, DelhiITA 1628/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Jul 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026