Hammedullha Chowdary vs. The Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation)

WP/31469/2026HC TelanganaHBHC01064698202607 October 2026Author: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA5 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition. The revenue submitted that an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, had been passed on 30.01.2026. The petitioners' counsel, while noting they had not received a copy of this order, stated that they would not press the writ petition at this stage. The Court, considering these submissions, disposed of the writ petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail such other legal remedies as may be available to them under law, pursuant to the assessment order dated 30.01.2026. No order as to costs was made. The interim applications, if any, were also closed.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Hammedullha Chowdary and Rohit Giri, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana challenging the continued retention of cash amounting to Rs. 35,50,000/- by the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation). They alleged this retention was without any formal proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and sought its refund with interest. The cash was reportedly handed over by the Station House Officer, P.S. Shahinayathgunj, Hyderabad, on 06-10-2023. The petitioners also filed an interim application seeking a direction for the respondent to consider their representation for the return of the seized cash pending the disposal of the writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the continued retention of the petitioners' cash by the 1st respondent without formal proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961, is illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction? (Question of law) The petitioners contended that the retention of cash was illegal and arbitrary as no formal proceedings had been initiated. They sought a writ of mandamus to direct the refund of the seized cash. The revenue, through the learned Senior Standing Counsel, submitted that the investigation has been completed and an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was passed on 30.01.2026. The petitioners' counsel acknowledged this submission but stated that a copy of the assessment order had not been served, and therefore, they were unaware of its contents. However, in light of the assessment order being passed, the petitioners' counsel stated they would not press the present writ petition at that juncture.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

134741 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 31469 OF 2026 Between: 1. Hammedullha Chowdary, S/o Mohd Hadees Choudhary (Late), aged about 56 years, Occ. Business, Fi,/o H.No.1-4-881111113, lndra Nagar, Bholakpur, Musheerabad, Hyderabad - 500 020, Telangana. 2. Rohit Giri, S/o Balashwar Giri, aged 28 years, Occ : Employee, Rl/o. Flat No.202, Golden Heights, Pillar No.218, Attapur, Hyderabad. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The Principal Director of lncome Tax (lnvestigation), Office of the Pr. DIT (lnv.), Vlll Floor, Ayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. 2. fhe Station House Officer, P.S. Shahinayathgunj, Hyderabad City' Telangana. 3. Union Of lndia, Represented By Secretary, To The Government Of lndia, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, Secretariat Building, New Delhi-1 10 001 . ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Nlicle 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIMUS, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in continued retention of the Petitioner's cash with the 1st Respondent without any formal proceedings under the lncome Tax Act, 196'l as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently directing the 1St Respondent to forthwith refund the seized cash of Rs.35'50,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) along with interest to the Petitioner. r---rrr:Fr: ? :=rEE:-=rtt 1.A. NO: 1OF 2026 Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent to consider representation dated. 27-04-2026 submitting by the petitioner for return of the seized cash of Rs.35,50,000/- which was handed over by letter dated 06-10-2023 c,f the 2nd Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SHAIK ABDUL KALAM RIYAZ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI N.PRAVEEN REDDY, SENIOR SC FOR IT DEPT Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI) THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION No.3l 469 of2026 (CNR No. H nHC o10646982026) DATE:07.10.2026 Between: Hammedullha Chowdary and another ..Petitioners AND The Principal Director of Income Tax Investigation and others ...Responden ts ORDER: bet Hon bte Sn &Lttice p.sam Kotht) 1'oday, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. N. Praveen Reddy, leamed Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, submits that, subsequently, the investigation has been completed and an assessment order has also been passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 30.01.2026, and that the same has been forwarded to the Bench

Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that a i copy of the said assessment order has not been served upon him and,

To 6 7 PSK. PB ?-(-- Paee 2 of 2 as such, he is nor. aware of the contents thereof. Nonetheless, he submits that, in view of the assessment order dated 30.0l.2026having been passed, he rnay not press the present writ petition at this juncture. Hor.r.ever, he seeks libefty to avail such other legal remedies as may be availablt: to him under law to assail the assessment order dated 30.01.2026. 3. Having regarrl to the submissions made by the leamed counsel for the parties, this rvrit petition is disposed of, reserving liberry to the petitioner to avail such other legai remedies as may be available to him under lau, pursuant to the assessment order dated 30.01.2026. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/.P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //II \\u SECTION OFFICER The Principal Director of lncome Tax ( lnvestigation), Office of the pr. DIT (lnv.), Vlll Floor, Ayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. The Station House Officer, P.S. Shah inayathgunj, Hyderabad City, Telangana. The Secretary, Union Of lndia, To The Government Of lndia, t\,4inistry Of Finance, North Block, Secretariat Building, New Delhi-1 10 001 . One CC to SRI SHAIK ABDUL KALAM RIYAZ, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOL|C|TOR GENERAL OF rNDrA [OPUC] one CC to SRI N PRAVEEN REDDY, SENTOR SC FOR tT DEPT [OPUC] Two CD Copies 2 3 4 E i

HIGH COURT DATED: 0711012026 ORDER WP.No.31469 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. l cof€ S 2:5 \to1re + 2 C k 1i a)o S H ( 6 ,{: WT '[/r 0{:l cr.r. h 4 )r, p--P- ,ri,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →