Mr.Kondal Reddy Kotha vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/29506/2026HC TelanganaHBHC01058190202610 September 2026Author: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. On the date of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, sought to withdraw the writ petition. The Court granted the prayer and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The petitioner was granted liberty to prefer a duly constituted appeal under the relevant provision of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, no findings were made on the legality of the addition of Rs. 67,56,383/- or the estimation of business profit at 3% of turnover. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn, with liberty to file an appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mr. Kondal Reddy Kotha, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The petition challenged assessment orders and appellate orders concerning Assessment Year 2018-19. Specifically, the petitioner sought to quash the addition of Rs. 67,56,383/- under Section 104 and the estimation of business profit at 3% of turnover, as well as the consequential demand of Rs. 85,41,510/-. The petitioner also sought an alternative direction for a de novo assessment. The authorities involved were the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal; the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi; and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A'. The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs. 67,56,383/- under Section 104 of the Income Tax Act, 2025, and the estimation of business profit at 3% of turnover for AY 2018-19 were illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the impugned orders were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions and natural justice. The assessee sought to quash these additions and estimations. Alternatively, the assessee requested a de novo assessment, including summoning and examining a specific individual and allowing cross-examination. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the issues raised by the assessee. The revenue was represented by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 104,Section 270(10),Section 246

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
13447 | IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 29506 OF 2026 Between: AND Mr.Kondal Reddy Kotha, S/o.Sri Kotha Venkat Ram Reddy, aged about 62 years, Fl/o.Flat No. E4, 4th Floor, Siri Apartments, Advocates Colony, Hanamakonda, Warangal District, Telangana - 506001 presently situated at 3507, SW Sommerstone Road, Bentonville AR, 72713, USA, representing through his Power of Attorney Smt.Jinuga N/uneesha, W/o-Sri Praveen Kumar Itilinam pati. ...PETITIONER 1 . The lncome Tax Officer, Ward- 1 , Warangal, Telangana. 2. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, rep.by its Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. 3, The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', rep. by its Registrar, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Arlicle 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 Certiorari, calling for the records relating to it; tf'e orO"t dated '15.04.2026 of the 3'd Respondent in iTn No. 1OOtHydt2025, (ii) the order dated 22.11.2024 of lhe 2"d Respondent under Section 359 read with section 532 of the lncome-tax AcL.2025. and (iii) the assessment order dated 23.03.2021 of the 1st Respondent under Section. 270(10) of the lncome-tax Act, 2025 lor A.Y. 201 8-19, and quash the same insofar as they make the addition of Rs.67,56,383/- under section 104 and the estimation of business profit at 3% of turnover, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14 and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and the principles of natural .justice; and in the alternative, direct the 1 Respondent to redo ih" ur.".rr"nt de rrovo on the said issues after summoning and examining Sri Mandapalli Nageshwarr Rao under section 246 of the Act and affording the Petitioner reasonable op[ortunily of hearing including cross-examination; and pass such other order or orders as thi; Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances, in the interest of justice. I.A. NO: 1OF 2026 Petition under Sr:ction 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supp:rt of the petition, the High coud may be pleased to stay the collection and recovery of the disputed demand of Rs.85.41,5'10/- for the Assessment Year 201B-19, together with interest thereon, and restrain all coercive proceedingsarisingl.herefrompursuanttotheorderdatedl504'2026ofthe3rd Respondent in ITA No.1 06iHydl2O25. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. B. KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MS. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY, SENIOR SC INCOME TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WP.No.29506 of 2026 CNR No. H 8HCO10581902026 Date:1O.09.2026 Between: Mr.Kondal Reddy Kotha .,,Petitioner And The Income Tax Officer & others ...Respondents ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr. B.Krishna Reddy,learned counsel for the petitioner Ml Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents.

2.

Today when the matter was taken up for hearing, leamed counsel for the petitioner on instructions to withdraw the instant petition with a liberty to prefer a duly constituted appeal under the relevant provision.

3.

As prayed for, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any shall stand closed. //' P. PRAMOD NAIK ASSISTANT BEGISTRAf, ,t SECilON OFFICER To AGK GJP 'I . One CC to N/Ft B KRTSHNA REDDy Advocate [OpUC]

2.

One CC to t\4S. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY, SENTOR SC TNCOME TAX loPUCl

3.

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT DATED: 1010912026 ORDER WP.No.29506; of 2026 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS rb yt F. S Tr1 1 f6 + o ( ( = a-' (- -) ,') 2 4 SEP2ff26 *- r .--r/t--: .., -,,

More judgments on Section 246

All 130 judgments and leading authorities on Section 246 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →