Rishab Sharma vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/1475/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01002686202528 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, while not deciding the merits of the case, has granted an interim stay of the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This interim relief is granted in light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Diary No. 2196 of 2026 and batch, decided on 10.04.2026. The High Court has directed that the writ petition be listed along with a batch of similar cases. The specific reasoning for the interim stay is not detailed beyond its reference to the Supreme Court's order, implying that the Supreme Court's decision likely addresses the procedural or substantive issues concerning such notices. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the court has only granted an interim measure.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rishab Sharma, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The petition challenges a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 24/04/2024, for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The petitioner contends that this notice is arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as well as Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India and Section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(1), Hyderabad, and the Assessment Unit, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi. The High Court, in its order dated 02/09/2026, listed the petition along with a batch of similar cases and granted an interim stay of the impugned order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2020-21 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 statutory provisions (Section 148A)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that the Section 148 notice is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional and statutory provisions. The petitioner relies on the Supreme Court's order in Diary No. 2196 of 2026 and batch, decided on 10.04.2026, which likely pertains to the validity or procedure of such notices. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue at this stage. The matter was listed along with a batch, and an interim stay was granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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: 1 475 oF 2025 134471 ...PETITIONER Between: AND Rishab Sharma, W/o Shiv Ratan Sharma, Aged about 27 years, Occ' Business, R/o 5-2-103 to '105, Flat No. 402, Pooja Residency, Vakil Wadi' Jambagh, Nampally, Hyderabad-95. 1 . The lncome Tax Officer, ward 5(1 )' lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad' 2.AssessmentUnit,lncomeTaxDepartment,Nationale-ASSeSSmentCenter NewDelhi,RoomNo4Ol,2ndFloor.E-RampJawaharlalNehruStadium' New Delhi 110 003. ...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 lvlandamus or any other appropriate writ order or Direction declaring the Notice under section 148 of lncome Tax Act, 2410412024 in DIN No. treA/nsrrslt+8_112024-25t1064330129 (1) for the Assessment Year 2020-21 as arbitrary illegal bad in law void-ab-initio violative of the principles of natural justice ip"r, r.* b"eing violative of Articles 14,19g and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and SLc laBA of th6 lncome Tax Act 1961 and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice and to pass in the interest of justice'

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 of 2026 and batch decided on 10.04.2026. SD/. K.V.O. NARSI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. Rishab Sharma, W/o Shiv Ratan Sharma, Aged about 27 years, Occ. Business, R/o 5-2-103 to '105, Flat No. 402, Pooja Residency, Vakil Wadi, Jambagh, Nampally, Hyderabad-95. 2. The lncome Tax Officer, ward 5(1), lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad. 3. 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. 4. The Section Officer, Writ Division Bench Section, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. 5. The Section Officer, Posting Section, High Court for the State of Telangana at H.Tderabad. 6. Ore CC to SMT. HIMANGINI SANGHI, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Ore CC to MR KAMASANI SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR S.C. FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies AGK d 6

(2 DRAFTS) HIGH COURT DATED: 0210912026 LIST ALONG WITH BATCH ORDER WP.No.1475 of 2025 INTERIM STAY { HE 5T4 2ffi 0[I 3 O1 lo t ou

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →