Sri Bramaramba Mallikharjuna Swamy Temple vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/13308/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01026097202529 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its order dated 09.09.2026, did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it listed the writ petition along with a batch of similar cases. In the interim, the Court granted a stay of the impugned orders. This interim stay was granted in light of an order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Diary No. 2196 of 2026 and batch, decided on 10.04.2026. The High Court's decision was procedural, focusing on maintaining the status quo pending the resolution of related matters before the Supreme Court. No findings were made on the validity of the notice or the assessment and penalty orders themselves.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri Bramaramba Mallikharjuna Swamy Temple, represented by its Executive Officer, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana. The petition challenges an assessment order dated 04.01.2024 passed by the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2018-19. This assessment order was a consequence of an order passed under Section 148A(d) dated 11.04.2022 and a notice under Section 148 dated 11.04.2022. The petitioner also challenges consequential penalty orders passed under Section 272A(1)(d) dated 20.06.2024 and Section 271AAC(1) dated 25.06.2024. The petitioner contends that the notice under Section 148 was issued by the Junior Assessing Officer (1st respondent) instead of the Assessing Officer (3rd respondent). The petition seeks to declare these orders as void, illegal, and contrary to the Income-tax Act and principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is invalid because it was issued by the Junior Assessing Officer instead of the Assessing Officer, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Act? (Question of law and mixed fact and law) Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner argues that the notice under Section 148 was issued by the wrong authority (JAO) instead of the designated authority (FAO), rendering the entire assessment and consequential penalty proceedings void and illegal. - The petitioner relies on the Income-tax Act and principles of natural justice to support their claim that the assessment proceedings must be initiated and conducted by the proper officer. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the petitioner's arguments. The Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appeared for the respondents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148A,Section 148,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

13447l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH 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: 13308 OF 2025 Between: sri Bramaramba Mallikharjuna swamy Tehple, Rep. by Executive officer Uppala Shashidhar, Beeramguda Village, Ameenpur, Medak, Telangana 502032 ...PETITIONER AND 1. The lncome Tax Officer, ward 1, Sangareddy, lncome Tax Office, Veerabhadra Nagar, New Bus Stand, Sangareddy, Telangana-502001 2. ThJ principal Commissionei of tncome Tax-2, Hyderabad, Signature Towers, Sy.No.6(Pj of Kondapur, Sy.37(P) of kothaguda, Opp' Botanical Gardens' Serlingampally, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad, Telangana-500084' 3. The A-ssessment unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp' Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003 ...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 Mandamus, declaring the Assessment order dt. 04.01 .2024 passed by the 3rd respondent d/s 147 r.w.s 144t1448 of the lncome-tax Act for A'Y 2018-19 vide DIN No' |TBA/AST/S/14712023-2411059350866(1), consequent to the order passed u/s 148A(d) dt. 11.04.2022 vide DIN No. ITBtuAST/F1148N2022-2311042698349(1) and the notice u/s 148 dt. 11.O4.2O22 vide DIN No. IT84/45T15,1148-112022-2311042699924(1),

issued by the JAO(1st respondent) instead of FAO(3rd respondent) and consequential penalty orders passed vide order u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act dl. 20.06.2024, and order u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act dl. 25.06.2024 as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act and cortrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. J.SUNITHA, SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER List along with batch. Meanwhile, there shall be interim stay of the impugned order, in the light of the order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order in Diary No.2'196 of 2026 and batch decided on 10.04.2026. SDI AHMED ABDULLAH KHAN ASSISTANT EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Sangareddy, lncome Tax Office, Veerabhadra Nagar, New Bur; Stand, Sangareddy, Telangana-SO2001 2. The Principal Oommissioner of lncome Tax-2, Hyderabad, Signature Towers, Sy.No.6(P) of Kondapur, Sy.37(P) of kothaguda, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serlingampally, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad, Telangana-500084. 3. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ivlinistry of Finance, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 '10003 4. Sri Bramarambrr ltrlallikharjuna Swamy Temple, Rep. by Executive Officer Uppala Shashidhar, Beeramguda Village, Ameenpur, lt4edak, Telangana 502032 5. The Section O'Ticer, Writ Division Bench Section, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Flyderabad. 6. The Section Officer, Posting Section, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. 7, One CC to SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN, Advocate [OPUC] B. One CC to Ms. J.SUNITHA, SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX [OPUC] 9. Two CD Copies PSK TKS \q--

HIGH COURT DATED: 09/09/2026 2 DRAFTS NOTE: LIST ALONG WITH BATCH ,; S rA. l'6 oA :)o\,) l:l ?l+ StP202$ 7 A) .i) /^ * ORDER WP.No.13308 of 2025 DIRECTION ;.it 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 →