Kavita Sharma, vs. The Income Tax Officer, ward 5(1),

PDF · subscribers
WP/1472/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01002670202528 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court has not decided the substantive issues of the writ petition on merits. Instead, it has ordered that the writ petition be listed along with a batch of similar cases. Pending the final decision, the Court has granted an interim stay of the impugned notice. This interim relief is based on an order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a related matter on April 10, 2026. The Court has not provided any reasoning for this interim stay beyond referencing the Supreme Court's order. No specific findings on the legality or validity of the Section 148 notice have been made at this stage. The operative direction is to list the case with others and maintain an interim stay.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kavita Sharma, has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad. The petition challenges a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated April 25, 2023, for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The notice was issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(1), Hyderabad, and the Assessment Unit, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi. The petitioner contends that the notice is arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, and violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India, as well as Section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The High Court has listed the matter along with a batch of similar cases and granted an interim stay on the impugned order, referencing an order by the Supreme Court dated April 10, 2026.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2019-20 is arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, and violative of the principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions (Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265) and Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee (Petitioner) argues that the notice is illegal and arbitrary, violating fundamental rights and procedural fairness. The revenue (Respondents) has not recorded any specific arguments in the provided text, but their role is to defend the validity of the notice issued under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND 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: 1472 OF 2025 Between: Kavita Sharma,, W/o Shiv Ratan Sharma, Aged about 51 year, Occ. Business, R/o 5-2-103 to '105, Flat No. 402 pooja residency, Vakil wadi, Jambagh, Nampally, Hyderabad-95. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The lncome Tax Officer, ward 5(1),, lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad 2. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center New Delhi, Room No 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi 1 10 003 ...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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction declaring the Notice under section 148 of lncome Tax Act, 25-04-2023 in DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/148-]12023-2411052333651(1 ) for the Assessment Year 2019-20 as arbitrary illegal bad in law void-ab-initio violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14,199 and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Sec 148A of the lncomeTaxAct 1961 . Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. HIMANGINI SANGHI Counsel for the Respondents: MR. KAMASANI SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR S.C. FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

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.2196 ot2Q26 and batch decided on 10.04.2026. SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Officer, ward 5(1),, lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad 2. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center New Delhi, Room No 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi 110 003 3. Kavita Sharma,, W/o Shiv Ratan Sharma, Aged about 51 year, Occ. Business, Fyo 5-2-'103 to 105, Flat No. 402 pooja residency, Vakil wadi, Jambagh, Nampally, Hyderabad-95. 4. The Section Officer, Posting Section, High Court at Hyderabad 5. The Section Officer, Writ Division Behch Section, High Court at Hyderabad. 6 One CC to SMT. HIMANGINI SANGHI Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to MR. KAMASANI SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR S.C. FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies AGK GJP

(2 DRAFTS) HIGH COURT DATED: 0210912026 LIST ALONG WITH BATCH ORDER WP.No.1472 of 2025 INTERIM STAY ]4 r 23SEP26 { Z Ci: '\-. '...t. -.._ _-_ - lr c"fi* f'? \,G 'jr\o9 J.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →