NEOASKA PHARMA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. The ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/12612/2026HC TelanganaHBHC01026492202629 June 2026Author: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the assessment order passed by the respondents for Assessment Year 2021-22 was unsustainable. The Court noted that the resolution plan was approved by the NCLT on June 28, 2023, and the Section 148 notice was issued on March 28, 2025, which was admittedly after the approval of the resolution plan. Relying on the well-settled law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, and followed by the High Court in similar writ petitions, the Court concluded that the assessment order could not be sustained. Consequently, the assessment order was set aside. The writ petition was allowed, and there was no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Neoaska Pharma Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated March 23, 2026, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for Assessment Year 2021-22. The petitioner had undergone Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), which was approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on June 28, 2023. The Income Tax Department issued a notice under Section 148 on March 28, 2025, and subsequently passed the impugned assessment order. The petitioner contended that the assessment proceedings were initiated and concluded after the approval of the resolution plan by the NCLT, which rendered them unsustainable.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is sustainable when it was passed after the approval of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)? Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the assessment proceedings, including the notice under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment order, were initiated and passed after the approval of the resolution plan by the NCLT. They relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and a similar decision by the High Court in W.P.No.3964 of 2024 and batch. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148

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 (Specia! Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry SIX PRESEIIT THE HONOURABI-E SR,Ii JIJSTIOE P.SAM I(OSHY Ai.lt) l'I-tE HONOUFIABLE SiItI ,,IUSTICE NT.R$ING RAO NAI.JDIKOhIDA' WRIT PETITION NO: 12612 OF 2026 Between: NEOASKA PHARMA PRiVATE LllvlITED, Door No 1-6611lCEOl1lPH Plot Ncr l CEO Enclave, Sy No. 136/2 and 13614, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Gachibowli, K.V.Rangareddy, Seri Lingampally, Telangana, lndia, 500032 Represented By lts Authorised signatory, Shri. Janke Krishna Reddy. ...PETITIONER AND '1 . The ASSISTANT COMIIIISS|ONER OF INCOME TAX, central CIRCLE - circle (1) (4) HYDERABAD 2. PRINCIPAL COMIVISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) HYDERABAD, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing all impugned Notices (Annexures 4,8,9,10) leading upto as also consequent to lmpugned Order dated 23.03.2026 bearing DIN ITBA/AST/S/14712025- 2611087750124(1 ) passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act in relation to Assessment Year 2021-22 (Annexure -1). l.A. NO: 1OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direction staying all further proceedings pursuant to / in consequence to impugned order dated 23.03.2026 and all notices (Annexures 8,9,10) issued pursuant thereto in relation to Assessment Year 2021-22, till the final disposal of this writ petition. Gounsel for the P,Etitiioner: SRI NAGESWAR RAO REPRESENTING FOR SRI tU. VENKATRAM REDDY Counsel i'or the Flespondents: SRI NARAYAN TOSHNTMAL REP. FOR sRl N. PRAVEEN REDDY (SR. SC FOR tT DEPT) The Court nlacle the fioltowin$: OAOen TN THE IIIGH COURT FOR TIIE STATE OF TELANGANA ATTIYDERABAD TTIE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE P. SAMKOSHY AND THE, HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSTNG RAO NANDTKONDA DATE OF ORDER:29.06.2026 BETWEEN: Neoaska Pharma Private Limited .Petitioner AND The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-Circle (1)(4), Hyderabad & another ...Respondents

ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Justice PSam Koshy)

1.

Heard Sri Nageswar Rao, leamed counsel representing Sri M.Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel on record for the petitioner and Sri Narayan Toshnimal, learned counsel representing Sri N.Praveen Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for lncome Tax Department representing the respondents.

2.

Challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the Assessment Order passed by the respondents for the Assessment year 2021-22, dated23.03.2Q26. 3. The primary challenge to the impugned order is on the ground that the petitioner having already undergone Corporate Insolvency 1

2 Resolution process and the proceedings have been already got it approved from National Company Law Tribunal (\CLI) on 28.06.2023 and after the resolution plan having got approved, the respondents -lncome Tax raised notice of demand and passed the impugned order dated 23.03.2026, which is against Corporate lnsolvency' Resolution Process

4.

In the instant case, undoubtedly, the resolution has been stood approved on 28.06.2023 and the Section 148 notice issued by the respondent No.i was on 28.03.2025, i.e., admittedly after the resolution plan's approval from the NCLT. The law in this regard has been well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court itself in the case of GIIAN'ASIIYAM MISHR{ AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH THE AUTHORISED Stc\dtoRY Vs. EDELWEISS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION coMpANy LTMITED THRouGH THE DrRlcroR A-ND oTHERS' and which has also been followed by the Division Bench of this Court in a batch of writ petitions i.e., W.P.No.3964 of 2024 and batch decided on 22.tJ2.2024

5.

Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra (cited supra), the legal position thus, having been laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned ' i2t,2 t 1 9 Supreme Court Cases 657

case of Ghanashyam Mishra and which has also been followed by this High Court in a series of writ petitions of similar nature, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessment Order passed in the instant case also for the same reason would not be sustainable and would be covered by the aforesaid decisions of the Supreme Court as also of this Court. The Assessment Order passed by the respondents, therefore, is unsustainable and deserves to be set-aside and accordingly is set-aside.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

7.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed C.DEEPIKA AS ISTANT REGIS //// CI]dN OFFICER To, 1 The ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME circle (1) (4) HYDERABAD pRINCtPAt- COMr,'llssloNER oF INCoME Tlrll, (C One CC to SRI One CC to SRI tw6 cD c:bpies Bht TKS , central CIRCLE - c ,+ 5 ENTRAL) HYDERABAD l,rl, VENKATRAM REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] NI PRAVEEN REDDY (SR. SC FOII. IT DEPT) [OPUC] Uy

HIGH COURT DATED: 2UAO|2026 ORDER Ui/F.No.12612 o12026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,l {{'"'t '; 0 5 sLlE 20m o (./ to * 4{r:r1;q p?l- ,\ ) rl, ( z aA i

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →