Avanti Feeds Ltd v. Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Bench
- WSTICE
Outcome
Dismissed
Th,: appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Two CD Copies kam/ghw / HIGH COURT DATED:07 tO1t2O2S \ \ JUDGMENT ITTA.No.38 of 2009 3 (liF- s r4 14- o( 10 | t_D I l-r 2025 a/ :-sF4ic\rf--o * r z a THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION .o€@ w ,il(e5…
Judgment
Cause title
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO lNco ME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No: 38 of 2009 Appeal filed under Section 260-4 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the Order dated 23-01-2009 passed in |.T.A.No.1170/Hydl04 for Assessment year 2OO1-02 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench-'B', Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 10-09-2004 passed in ITA No.0065/ClT(Ay04- 05 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) -ll, Hyderabad preferred against the Assessment Order dated 26-03-2004 passed in P.A.N./G.l.R. No.AABCA7365E on the file of the lncome Tax Department. Between: Avanti Feeds Ltd.,6-3-658, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500 082 ...APPELLANT
AND Dy. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-1(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT
\ Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri M.V. Ramachandra Rao(No Representation) Counsel for the Respondent:
Mr. J.V. Prasad, (Sr. Standing Counsel for lncome Tax) The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL No.38 of 2OO9
JUDGMENT:
(Per the Hon'ble ttrc Chief Justice AIok Aradhe) None for the appellant Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department for the respondent.
2. None had appeared on behalf of the appeJlant even on
20.r2.2024
3. It appears the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the aPPeal.
Operative part
4. Th,: appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Miscella:reous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There r;hal1 be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// edl-a.v.s.s.c.s.M. SARMA JOINT REGISTRAR , l\L--- V SECTION OFFICER To,
The lncome 1-ax Appellate Tribunal' Bench-'B" Hyderabad'
The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) -ll' Hyderabad'
The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax' Circle 1(1)' Hyderabad 4. One CC to Sri M.V Ramachandra Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 'v
One CC to Mr. J.V. Prasad (Sr- Standing Counsel for lncome Tax) [OPUC]
Two CD Copies kam/ghw / HIGH COURT DATED:07 tO1t2O2S \ \ JUDGMENT ITTA.No.38 of 2009 3 (liF- s r4 14- o( 10 | t_D I l-r 2025 a/ :-sF4ic\rf--o * r z a THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION .o€@ w ,il(e5 \1 i i j €
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Th,: appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Tax Act, 1961.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.