High Court for the State of Telangana · Procedural orders and remands

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Hyderabad v. New Oriental Trawlers (P) Ltd.

I.T.T.A. No. 98/2012 ·

Revenue appeal withdrawn under Circular 9/2024, with revival reserved if Circular 5/2024 exceptions apply.

1. FACTS OF THE CASE

Revenue’s ITTA 98/2012 against New Oriental Trawlers (P) Ltd challenged the Tribunal’s 9 October 2009 order in ITA 666/Hyd/2008 for AY 2004-05.

Source: PDF p.1, caption and prayer

2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT

Revenue counsel requested withdrawal in view of CBDT Circular 9/2024 dated 17 September 2024 and liberty to seek revival if the appeal fell within exceptions in Circular 5/2024 dated 15 March 2024.

Source: PDF p.2, paragraphs 1–2

3. JUDICIAL DECISION

The Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn and expressly granted liberty to seek revival if the case fell within the exceptions in Circular 5/2024.

Source: PDF p.2, paragraph 3

4. OUTCOME

The appeal ended without costs and pending miscellaneous applications were closed. The order contains no adjudication of the underlying tax merits or finding that a particular exception applies.

Source: PDF p.2, concluding paragraph

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings.

The two circular references serve different roles

Counsel cited Circular 9/2024 as the reason for withdrawal, while the operative reservation refers to exceptions in Circular 5/2024. Keeping those references separate accurately states the Court’s conditional disposal without attempting to restate the circulars beyond this source.

Source: PDF p.2, paragraphs 1–3

Revival is a reserved possibility, not a present finding

The exception condition must be satisfied before the reservation could support a later revival request. The Court does not identify an exception, determine its applicability or automatically reopen the appeal. Nor does withdrawal affirm the Tribunal’s reasoning on merits.

Source: PDF p.2, paragraph 3

The docket limits what can be inferred

The company’s name does not establish the nature of the disputed deduction or business income. Neither the prayer nor the operative order supplies a substantive tax issue.

Source: PDF pp.1–2, prayer and order

Source and verification

Complete 3-page original reviewed; source bytes verified.

Original PDF: 3 pages · SHA-256: 39a393150b34a88fa746e88e53334c6a0f7ee59eb15bc53e58842934895bdcfb

Full original and all five panels re-reviewed on 21 October 2026.

Current law and subsequent treatment not independently verified.

Subsequent proceedings and current judicial treatment have not been independently verified.

AI disclosure and professional disclaimer

AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.

General research only. Read the complete judgment and verify applicable law and subsequent treatment before reliance.