Nb. Firasat Ali Khan vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, in Charge of

PDF · subscribers
WP/12983/2007HC TelanganaHBHC01029549200719 June 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition. The Court noted that the connected writ petition, W.P. No. 1764 of 2006, filed by HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust (respondent No. 5), had been withdrawn by the Trust vide an order dated June 28, 2023. In light of the withdrawal of the said writ petition, the Court was of the considered opinion that nothing survived in the instant writ petition. Furthermore, the Court took into account the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No. 3, which stated that the petitioner had not approached the Income Tax Department to ventilate his grievance. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, reserving the right of the petitioner to avail other appropriate legal remedies. No order as to costs was made. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Nb. Firasat Ali Khan, filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 to 3 (Income Tax authorities) in not releasing quarterly interest on a Fixed Deposit (FD) of Rs. 9.66 crores, which was under lien to the Department, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought a direction to release the interest for two quarters ended on March 13, 2007, and June 13, 2007. The petitioner requested to tag this writ petition with W.P. No. 1764 of 2006, filed by HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust (respondent No. 5). However, W.P. No. 1764 of 2006 was withdrawn by the Trust by an order dated June 28, 2023. The respondents 1 to 3 had also stated in their counter-affidavit that the petitioner had not approached the Income Tax Department to ventilate his grievance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the action of the Income Tax authorities in not releasing the quarterly interest on the Fixed Deposit of Rs. 9.66 crores, which is under lien to the Department, is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law, and violative of natural justice? (Question of law and fact, concerning the powers and duties of tax authorities under relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and principles of natural justice). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the withholding of interest on the FD was illegal and arbitrary, seeking a direction for its release. The petitioner relied on the fact that the writ petition was initially sought to be tagged with another petition filed by the Nizam's Jewellery Trust. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counter-affidavit, stated that the petitioner had not approached the Income Tax Department to ventilate his grievance. The revenue implicitly argued that the petitioner had not exhausted available administrative remedies.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

13447 I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12983 OF 2OO7 .PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of lncome Tax, ln Charge of HEH the Nizams Circle, lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad. The Joint Commissioner of lncome Tax Range 9, lncome Tax Department' Hyderabad- The Asst,. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 9 , lncome tax Department, Hyderabad. The Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust, Purani Haveli, 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 lvtandamus or any other writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not releasing the quarterly interest on the FD of Rs. 9.66 crores under lien to Department as illegal, arbitrary' contrary to law and violative of natural justice and pass such other or further order as this Hon',ble court may deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. 1.A. NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP. NO:'16204 oF 2007) Between: Nb. Firasat Ali Khan, aged about 64 years, S/o. Nb. Sadat Jah Bahadur, 8-2-12011151C, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 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 direct the respondents .1 to 3 to release the interest for two quarters ended on 13-3-2007 and 13-6-2007 2 2 4 5

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI Ms. AKANKSHA SINGH RE )RESENTING SRl. M SHIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI K. SUDHAKAFI REDDY SC FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for the Respondent NOS.4&5: --- The Court made the following: ORDER

w * THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA IIIRIT PETITION No.12983 of2OO7 ORDER: fiter Hon'ble Srt Justice P.Sam Koshy/ The instant Writ Petition has been fiied seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ; order or direction declaring the action respondent Nos.1 to 3 in not releasing the quarterly interest on the FD of Rs.9.66 crores under lien to Department, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently to direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to release the interest for the two quarters ended on 13.03.2007 and 13.06.2007. 2. Heard Ms.Akanksha Singh, learned counsel representing Sri M.Shiva Kumar, learned counsel for the pelitioner and Sri K.Sudhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned counsel requested to tag this writ petition along with W.P No' 1764 of 2006, which was fried by HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust, respondent No.S herein. However, it appears that the said writ petition i.e., W.P.No. 1764 of 2006 has been withdrawn by the Trust uid-e order , dated 28.06 .2023 . In the light of withdrawal of said writ petition, it appears -11 ,n. grievance of the petitioner therein,

2 which is part of the petitioner herein, the writ pelition is no longer survives. In the teeth of withdrawal of said writ petition, we are of the considered opinion that nothing would survive in the instant writ petition as well, more particularly in the light of counter- affidavit filed by respondent No.3, wherein they ha,,e stated that the petitioner has not approached the Income lax Department ventilating his grievance. 4. Thr-rs, this Writ Petition is also stands disposed of reserving the right of the petitioner to avail the other appropriate legal remedies. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR .t secttbu oFFlcER The Commissioner of lncome Tax, in Charge of' HEH the Nizams Circle'' lncome Tax Department, HYderabad' The Joint Commissioner of lncome Tax Range 9, lnconre Tax Department, Hyderabad. The Asst,. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 9 ' lncome tax Department' Hyderabad. The [r,4anager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry' h{yderabad' HEH the Nizam's Jewellery Trust, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad' One CC to SRl. M SHIVA KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI K. SUDHAKAR REDDY SC FOR INCOIVIE TAX [OPUCI Two CD CoPies //TRUE COPY// To, 1 2 3 7. 8. KKS PVL 4 5 6 1/

., HIGH COURT DATED:1 910612025 ORDER WP.No.12983 of 2007 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS /0 -2,1 ,. - 1_ /,4 :\': -: i'. - /,': \ ,,:i. ::'. 10 Sicp ttts \r', 4,rt- ;_ /, /t5 a l I I I I I I I I , I I I iI I I ! I I I

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →