Telangana High Court
WP/33769/2010 of MAYTAS INFRA LTD., HYD Vs THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD AND ANO on 6 January 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW SIX THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HON'BLE SRI JUST]CE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION O: 33769 OF 2010 Maytas lnfra Ltd., A company
[ 348e 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW SIX
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
THE HON'BLE SRI JUST]CE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION
O: 33769 OF 2010
Maytas lnfra Ltd., A company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, with its Regd. Office 3'" Floor, Amogh Plaza, No.6-3-1186/5/A, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Rep. by its General Manager ( Legal and Contracts )
...PETITIONER
D
1. The Dy. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 9, Hyderabad.
2. The Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 1, Hyderabad RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated In the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any writ, order or direction declaring that the order dt. 2711212010 referring to audit uls. 142 (2A) of the l.T.Act the accounts for the years ended 31-3-2003, 31:3-2005 and 31-3-2008 as illegal, arbitrary, and untenable and to declare that the accounts of the petitioner conipany are not liable for audit u/s. 142 (2A).
Counsel for the
{,.-.. r'
+_r'i i-ir.i:.
Petitioner: Ms. SAGARIKA KONERU, REPRESENTING
SRIY. RATNAKAR
Gounsel for the Respondents: SRI K. SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR S.C. FOR INCOME TAX
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE SRt .IUSTICE P:SAM KOSHY
AND
HC)N'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITIO
o.33769
N
of 20I0
t.2026
Between:
Maytas lnfia Ltd., Hyderabad
...Petitioner
nnd
'the Dy.Cornmissioner of Income 1'r,t. I l-yderabad and another
...Respondents
ORDER: (per l{on'ble Sri.lustice P.,\utrt Koshy)
Ms.sagarika Koneru. learncd counsel representing Mr.Y.Ratnakar, learned counsel for petitioner. sutr,rrits that the cause of action does not survive any further and the writ pctriion can be accordingly disposed of.
2.
Accordingly, thc Writ Pctitiri* :;tilfldS disprl5sd of as having become infructuous. There shall be trcr order its to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any. shall stand closed.
To
MP dT
SD/-K. MADHAVI
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
/
6
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
1. The Dy. co,nmissioner of lncome Tax, centrar circre - 9, Hyderabad.
2. The commissioner of lncome Tax, central circle - 1, Hyderabad
3. One CC to liRl Y. RATNAI(AR, Advocate [OpUC]
4. one cc to {iRl K. SUDHAKAR REDDy, senior s;c. for lncome Tax [opUC]
5, Two CD Copies
.l*
.ri.E.
'.$i
li ct, a
I
/
HIGH COURT
DATED:06/01 12026
THE S
c(i
o
ti 3 r:Q ?1126
AS INFRUCTUOUS
WITHOUT COSTS .
*
*
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
WP.No.33769 of 2010 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION I.) A{ t l\*