M/S. DEEPODAYA FINANCE CORPORATION, HYDERABAD. V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, HYDERABAD.

ITTA/167/2008

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Deepodaya Finance Corporation, which filed multiple appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the common order dated 27-04-2007 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. The appeals pertained to the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, and 1996-97. The primary contention was regarding the reopening of assessments under Section 148 of the Act, which the appellants argued was vitiated as the return of income had already been filed. However, the Tribunal and subsequent authorities found that the reopening was justified and that the appellants had participated in the reassessment proceedings. The High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, concluded that the issues raised were factual and did not constitute a substantial question of law, leading to the rejection of the appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 688057 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: BOKARO SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Income Tax; Income tax appellate tribunal; Reassessment
• Section: 148; 260A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO.NANDIKONDA INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL Nos: 167. 168 & 169 OF 2008 |.T.T.A. NO. 167 0F 2008 Appeal filed under Section 260(A) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, against the order daled 27-04-2007 passed in lTA.No. 504 lHydl 1999 for tlTe (assessment year 1994 -95) on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated '13-03-2001 passed in l.T.Appeal No. 40, 41 & 47lTTO-1 (6y CIT (A)-1 / 2000-01 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-|, Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 30-03-2000 passed in PAN/GlR No. D-308 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-7, Hyderabad. Between: M/s. Deepodaya Finance Corporation, 16-1 1 -477 13, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT AND The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (6) Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A. V.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel forthe Respondent: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY NCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 158 OF 2008 Appeal filed under Section 260(A) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961' against the order daled 27-04-2007 passed in lTA.No.524 /Hyd/ 1999 for the (assessment year 1995 -96) on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 13-03-2001 passed in l.T.Appeat No. 40, 41 & 47tTTO-1 (6y CIT (A)-1 / 2000-01 on the fite of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-|, Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 31-03-2000 passed in PAN/GIR No. D-308 on the file of the lncome Tax Officer, W.1 (6), Hyderabad. Between M/s. Deepodaya Finance Corporation, 16-1 1 -4Zl 13, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (6) Hyderabad ..RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. A.V.A. S|VA KART|KEYA Counsel forthe Respondent: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY I.T.T.A. NO. 't69 0F 2008: Between: M/s. Deepodaya Finance Corporation, 16-11-47713, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad ..APPELLANT AND The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - '1 (6) Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. A. V.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY The Court made the fotlowing COMMON ORDER: Appeal filed under Section 260(A) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 27-04-2007 passed in lrA.No.525 lHydt 2oo1 for the (assessment year 1996 -97) on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad preferred against the order daled 13-03-2001 passed in t.T. Appeat No. 40, 41 & 4ilTTO_1 (6)/ CIT (A)-1 / 2000-01 on the file of the Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)_|, !ty!9gt_aO preferred against the Order dated 31-03-2001 'passed'in PAN/clR No. D-308 on the file of the lncome Tax Officer, W.1 (6), Hyderabad. t THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA I ! I I.T.T.A.Nos.167 168 and 169 of2OOE COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the Hoft'ble Sn Justice P. Sam Koshg) The instalt appeals have been hled by the appellants under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act) assailing the common order dated 27.O4.2OO7, in I.T.A.Nos.5O4 lHydl1999, I.T.A.No.524 &' 5251Hyd12001, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad 'A' Bench (for short, the \"Tribunal') for the assessment year 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 - 2. Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the appellants, and Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing on behalf of the respondent. 3. The challenge in the instant appeals are on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to see that the reopening proceedings under Section 148 of the Act stood vitiated as the return of income has already been frled, and therefore, no reassessment proceedings could have been initiated. 4. However, perusal of the records would show that the authority concerned had reopened the assessment under Section 148 of the Act and had gralted two opportunities to the appellants herein and the Page 2 of 2 appellants also participated in the proceedings, arrd l.hereafter, the impugned common order has been passed. That the order passed by the Tribunal was subjected to chaJlenge before the commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - I, Hyderabad, as also before the Tribunal. However, the appellants have lost at all forums. 5. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not frnd the question raised by the appellants to be a question of law, much less a substa,tial question of law, as all the grounds raised aie pure question of facts having been duly considered by the authorities concerned at a]l levels. 6. The appeals thus being devoid of merit, fails and are accordingly rejected. No costs. 7 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed Sd/-K. SRINIVASA RAO, OINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench 'A' Hyderabad 2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-|, Hyderabad 3. The lncome Tax Officer, WARD 1 (6), Hyderabad. 4. One CC to SRl. A. V. KRISHNA KOUNDINYA, Advocate TOPUCI 5. One CC to Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies Kul HIGH COURT PSKJ & NNRJ DATED:1210212025 2 I APn 2025 C ,6t SIql .9 p/ r r'q(O 1 Op 6 -) t COMMON JUDGMENT lTTA.No.167, 168 AND 169 of 2008 REJI]CTING TIIE Il\"IA WITHOUT COSTS I k "