Niranjan Kumar Jain vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 1(1)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed an application to implead a proposed respondent as respondent No.3 in the writ petition, finding it necessary given the challenge to the vires of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court also allowed an application for amendment of the prayer in the writ petition, directing the petitioner to complete the amendment within ten days. Consequently, the matter was directed to be listed before an appropriate Bench with the relevant roster, taking into account the amended prayer and the challenge to the statutory provision. The interim order previously granted was extended until the next date of hearing. The substantive issue regarding the vires of Section 147-A was not decided on merits in this proceeding.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, represented by Mr. Prudhviraj Mattapally, filed a writ petition challenging the vires of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. An application (I.A.No.1 of 2026) was filed to implead a proposed respondent as respondent No.3, which was deemed necessary due to the challenge to the statutory provision. This application was allowed. Another application (I.A.No.2 of 2026) was filed seeking amendment of the prayer in the writ petition, which was also allowed, with the petitioner directed to carry out the amendment within ten days. The High Court directed the matter to be listed before an appropriate Bench with the relevant roster, considering the amendment and the challenge to the vires of Section 147-A. The interim order previously granted was extended until the next date of hearing.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the provisions contained in Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are ultra vires (beyond the powers of the legislature). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner is challenging the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that it is ultra vires. Specific arguments supporting this contention are not detailed in the provided text, but the nature of the challenge implies a question of legislative competence or violation of fundamental rights. Revenue's Contentions: No specific contentions for the revenue are recorded in the provided judgment extract. The focus is on procedural aspects and the continuation of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA MAIN CASE No: WP.No.14430 of 2023
PROCEEDINGS SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE
16.09.2026 PSK,J & NTR,J Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Prudhviraj Mattapally, learned
counsel representing Mr.Manmohan Dundu
I.A.No.1 of 2026
This application seeking to implead proposed respondent No.3 in the writ petition is taken-up.
Since challenge in the writ petition is to the vires of the provisions contained in Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, impleadment of proposed respondent as respondent No.3 is necessary. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the implead petition.
Accordingly, I.A. stands allowed. I.A.No.2 of 2026
This application seeking amendment of prayer in the writ petition is taken-up.
For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this application, this application is ordered.
Let amendment be carried out within a period of ten days. Contd..2/-
Transferred to i/o folder, before corrections, if any.
WP.No.14430 of 2026
Let the matter be listed for hearing before an appropriate Bench having roster in the light of amendment and challenge made to the vires of provisions contained in Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Interim order granted earlier shall stand extended till the next date of hearing.
________
PSK,J
________
NTR,J
Nvl
More judgments on Section 147-A
- Pushkar Vishwas, Bulandshahr vs Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3), BulandshahrITA 5661/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed11 Nov 2025AY 2011-12
- Jaivir, Sonepat vs Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, SonepatITA 3275/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
- Impressions Services Private Limited, Delhi vs ADIT Circle 10(1), DelhiITA 3275/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed5 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
- Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Sadhuram G AndaniITR/103/19955 Dec 2014
- C.I.T vs Motichand Virpal ShahITR/36/20037 Nov 2014
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sandhyarani Das vs. The Superintendent Of CGST And Central ExciseOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- M/S.Pitabas Jena,Pokharigaon, Cuttack vs. Supernitendent, Cuttack-Iii, Range, CuttackOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Sudarshan Behera vs. Superintendent Angul Circle, AngulOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Gayatri Priyadarshini Bisoi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Cuttack-Ii,Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- M/S Jaleswar Packaging, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 11 Nov 2026