Sudhaker Reddy Dhavadi vs. Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/15047/2026HC TelanganaHBHC01030701202605 May 2026Author: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court noted that the notice dated 07.04.2022, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2015-16, was admittedly issued beyond the period of six years from the end of the assessment year. The revenue, through its learned Senior Standing Counsel, accepted this fact, acknowledging that the notice was barred by limitation. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the notice dated 07.04.2022. As a direct consequence of the invalid notice, the assessment order dated 16.03.2024 and any consequential penalty orders were also set aside. The Court passed no order as to costs. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sudhaker Reddy Dhavadi, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad challenging an assessment order dated 16.03.2024 passed by the Assessment Unit (2nd Respondent) under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2015-16. The petitioner also challenged consequential penalty orders and an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 250. The primary ground for challenge was that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 07.04.2022, was issued beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, making it barred by limitation. The petitioner sought to declare the orders as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of constitutional and statutory provisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 07.04.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2015-16 is barred by limitation, considering it was issued beyond the period of six years from the end of the assessment year? Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148 was issued admittedly beyond the period of six years. The assessment year being 2015-2016, the time limit for issuing such a notice would have expired on 31.03.2022. However, the notice was issued on 01.04.2022, which is beyond the statutory period. Revenue's Contention: Upon instructions and considering the stand taken by the Solicitor General before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, particularly concerning Assessment Year 2015-2016, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department accepted that the notice was indeed issued beyond the period of six years and is therefore barred by limitation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 271(1)(b),Section 271(1)(c),Section 271F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 15047 OF 2026 Between: Sudhaker Reddy Dhavadi, S/o. Shiva Reddy, aged about 62 years, Occ.Business, Rlio. Sri Balaji Poultry and Traders, Dwaraka Nagar, 504001, presently RJo. D. No.4 3-74121b, Dwaraka Nagar,Adilabad, Cotton Market, Telangana - 504001. .....PETITIONER AND 1. lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Beside Dasnapur Petrol Pump, Adilabad - 504001 2. Assessment Unit,, lncome Tax Department, National E-assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 1'10 003. 3. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals),, National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, through the Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax (NaFAC), Delhi, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001 . .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 ot tle 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 in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring. (a).the Assessment Order dated 16.03.2024 bearing DIN No. IT8A/45T/5/14712023-2411062726328(1) passed by the 2nd Respondent uls. 147 r.w.s. '1448 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2015-16, (b).consequential penalty orders passed by the 2nd Respondent, levying penalties u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act vide order dated 28.06.2024 bearing DtN No. ITBA/PNUF/271(1)(b)12o24-25l1066270367(1 ), u/s. 271(i)(c) of the Act vide order dated 13 09 2024 bearing DIN No ITDA/PNUF/271(1)(c)l2o7a- 2511068654354(1 ) and u/s. 271F of the Act dated 28.06.2024 bearing DIN No. tfBA/pNL/Fi271Ft2O24- 2511066180733(1), for the Assessment Year 2015-16, and e(c).the order of the 3rd Respondent dated O2.O3.2026 bearing DIN No. ITBtuNFAC/S/250t2O25- 2611086759241(1 ), passed u/s 250 of the lncome Tax Act, '1961 as arbitrary, illegal, baned by limitation, bad in law, void ab initio, apart from being violative of Article 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Section 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice. |.A.NO:1 OF 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 to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order dated 16.03.2024 bearing DIN No. ITBtuAST/S/14712023-2411062726328(1) passed by the 2nd Respondent uls. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the lncome Tax Act, '1961 for the Assessment year 2015-16. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.PRABHABATI Counsel for the Respondents : Ms. B.SAPNA REDDY, (SR SC FOR INCOME TAX)

The Court made the following ORDER

I I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOI.IRABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA W.P.No.15 047 ot2026 Datc:05.05.2026 Between: Sudhaker Reddy Dhavadi, Adilabad . . Petitioner And The Income Tax Officer, Adilabad and others Respondents OR-DER, (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr.K.Prabhabati, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Ms.B.Sapna Reddy, leamed Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents.

2.

The present is the case where notice dated 07-04.2022 issued under Section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, is under challenge.

3.

The Assessment Year in the present case is 2015-2016- In addition to the challenge to the said notice being given by the amendment brought to the Income Tax Act with effect from Ol.O4.202l,leamed counsel for the petitioner had also challenged the same on being barred by limitation, as the notice has been issued admittedly beyond the period of six years. The assessment year being 2015-2016, time timit within which notice could have -rj

w 2 been issued on 31 .03.2022 and in the instant case. the notice has been issued admittedly beyond the period of six years i.e. on 01.04.2022

4.

On thc previous date of hearing, leamed Standing Counsel for the Department had taken time to seek instructions

5.

Upon instructions, learned Senior Standing Oounsel lor the Income Tax Dcpartment taking into consideration the stand taken by the leamed Solicitor General before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, more pafticularlr", in rcspcct ol the assessment year 2015-2016 accepts that notice has bcen infact issued beyond the period of six years. As such. the notice is bancd by limitation.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. Notice dated 07.04.2022 stands set aside/quashed and the consequent assessment order also stands set aside/quashed. No order as to costs Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed HUSSAIN ALI SISTANT REGISTRAR /T//

1.

The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Beside Ddsn 504001 . SECTION OFFICER a ur Petrol Pump, Adilabad - To 2. The Assessment unrt, rncome_^Tax_ oepart#ent, Nationar E-assessment Center, New Delhi, Room^No. 401 , 2nd Ffolr,-i_nrrp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003. 3. The Commissioner o,,.?"or1. . Tax (Appeals),, National Faceless Appeal center' Derhi throuoh the principar it'CIi'io-i,.sroner of rncome Tax (NaFAC), Dethi. NortiBtock, New O"rf,i _ iio O"oi.''

7

4.

One CC to SRI K.PRABHABATI, Advocate [OPUC]

5.

One CC to Ms. B SAPNA REDDY, (SR SC FOR INCOIME TAX), Advocate loPUCl

6.

Two CD Copies SA TKS

\ HIGH COURT DATED: 0510512026 ORDER WP.No.15047 ot 2026 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \ 5 reta4 v v * o UJt :) ) a"\.v {i I: e1. , ')) n' dr s'7 .. t/ ;r kl,, "r.( "-t- ii

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →