Mirza Ahmed Hussain Baig vs. Principle Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

PDF · subscribers
WP/40657/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01081580202506 January 2026Author: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition without commenting on the merits of the challenge to the assessment order. The Court directed that if the petitioner makes an application to the jurisdictional assessing officer within two weeks for the adjustment of the self-assessed tax of Rs. 2,92,983 paid for the assessment year 2024-25, the said authority shall consider it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter. No order as to costs was made. The issue regarding the filing of an updated return was implicitly not pursued by the petitioner as the focus shifted to the adjustment of tax paid.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mirza Ahmed Hussain Baig, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 07.11.2025 for Assessment Year 2024-25, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment was based on a scrutiny revealing a large deduction claimed under Section 80G (Old Tax Regime). The petitioner's request to file an updated return under Section 139(8A) was not entertained. During submissions, the petitioner highlighted that an amount of Rs. 2,92,983 paid as self-assessment tax was not considered in the assessment order. The petitioner sought relief by having this tax paid adjusted against the determined liability.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an updated income tax return under Section 139(8A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in light of the press release dated 23.12.2025, to address deductions/exemption claims identified as potentially ineligible through risk analytics? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner initially sought to file an updated return, referencing a press release encouraging voluntary review of claims. However, the primary focus shifted to the non-consideration of self-assessment tax paid. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the learned Senior Standing Counsel, did not directly address the updated return issue but suggested that the petitioner could approach the jurisdictional assessing officer with the prayer for adjustment of tax paid or file a rectification application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 80G,Section 139(8A),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 406s7 0F 2025 Between: ig Aged Alijah, [ 3488 I about. 39 Hyderbad- Mirza Ahmed Hussain years, Occ. employee 500048. S/o. Mirza Ahmed Mukhtar Ba 23-1-562, Bibi Bazar, Kotla Baig, Rl/o. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Principle Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, North Block, New Delhi 2. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National-e-Assessment Center New Delhi, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi 110003 ...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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction declaring the inaction of Respondents in not permitting the Petitioner to file an updated income tax return under the purview of the press release dated 23-12-2025 wherein the Respondents has taken an initiative to encourage taxpayers to voluntarily review deductions/exemption claims identified as __+otentially-jnetigibte thr-ough risk analytics and conseque-ntly s-et aside the Assessment order dated 07-11-2025 vide DIN ITBA/AST/Si143(3y2025- 2611082373924(1) for the Assessment year 2024-25 thereby permitting the Petitioner to file an updated income tax return for the assessment year 2024- 2025 in the interests of justice lA NO: 1 oF 2025 petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceeding which are being initiate by the Respondent against the Petitioner in Assessment order dated 22-12-2025 vide DIN I TBA/AST/S/ 1 43( 3 )/ 2025 -26 t 1 08237 3924( 1 ) fo r th e Asse ss ment y ear 2024-25 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. HIMANGINI SANGHI Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (sENloR sc lNcoME TAX)

The Court made the following: ORDER

TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTTCE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDTN WRIT PETITION No.40657 of 2025 Dated: 06.01.2026 Between: Mirza Ahmed Hussain Baig . .. Petitioner and Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, North Block, New Delhi, 'and another. ...Respondents ORDER: Learned counsel Ms. Himangini Sanghi appears for the petitioner Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department, appears for the respondents I I

2

2.

The impugned assessment order under Section I43(3) read with Section l44B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") on scrutiny assessment lor the reason ''large deduction is claimed u/s. 80G (Old Tax Regime)" has been passed fbr the assessmcnt year 2024-2025 on 07.ll.2025 against the petitioner \,vhose request for filing an updated return under Section 139(84) of the Act was not entertained. 3. 1'hough the challenge is to the assesslnent order by referring to this issue on the Press Release dated 23.12.2025, during the course of submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has rcferred to the statement made at paragraph 7 of the writ affidavit that an amount of Rs.2,92,9831- paid under self-assessment tax has not been considered by respondent No.2 while passing the assessment order. The petitioner wants to confine his relief to adjustment of the tax paid against the liability l.rxed by the assessment order.

4.

Learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner can approach the jurisdictional assessing officer with the said prayer which will be considered in accordance with law. In the alternative, the petitioner can ( I _) j

3 ,TO, also file a rectification application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act.

5.

Learned counsel fbr the petitioner submits that if so directed, the petitioner would make such an application for adjustment of the tax already paid before the jurisdictional assessing officer.

6.

In that view of the matter, the instant r.vrit petition is disposed of without commenting on the merits of the challenge to the assessment order. If the petitioner makes an application r,vith the afbresaid prayer for adjustment of tax said to have been paid as self-assessed tax in respect of the same assessment year before the jurisdictional assessing officer within a period of two weeks, the same shall be considered in .i, accordande with taw by the said authority within a period of fbur weeks . thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/-A.H.S. GOWRI SHAN ASSISTANT REG //// CTION OFFICER sp

1.

The Principle Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, North Block, New Delhi

2.

Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National-e-Assessment Center New Delhi, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi 110003

3.

One CC to SRl. HIMANGINI SANGHI Advocate IOPUCI

4.

One CC to Ms BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (SENIOR SC INCOIVE TAX) IoPUCI

5.

Two CD Copies BM BS

/ I I I \ 1 I HIGH COURT DATED:06/0112026 ORDER WP.No.40657 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \\ t / /

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →