Dr. K.A. Ravi Varma Prasad vs. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

WP/22431/2021HC TelanganaHBHC01036522202112 March 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the matter. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rohit Pogula, prayed for the withdrawal of the instant writ petition. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No order was made as to costs. All pending miscellaneous applications were also closed as a sequel to the dismissal of the writ petition. The court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's claims regarding the legality of the seizure or the release of the funds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dr. K.A. Ravi Verma Prasad, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The petition challenged the action of the respondents in seizing Rs. 1,27,00,000/- of the petitioner's money via a panchanama dated 21/02/2019. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare this seizure illegal, direct the release of the seized money, and restrain further inquiries. The respondents included the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Assistant Director of Income Tax, Inspector of Police, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Union of India. An interim application was also filed seeking to restrain coercive steps against the petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the action of the Respondents in seizing Rs. 1,27,00,000/- of the Petitioner's money vide panchanama dated 21/02/2019 is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Criminal Procedure Code, 1973? (Question of law and fact, turning on provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, IPC, and CrPC). Contentions: Assessee: Argued that the seizure of Rs. 1,27,00,000/- was illegal and contrary to statutory provisions. Sought release of the money and restraint on further inquiries. Revenue: No arguments recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (Special Originat Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FI\IE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTilEOruANSING RAO NANDIKONOA WRIT PETITIO N NO:22431 0F 2021 Between: Dr. K.A Ravi Vgrma-pra_sad, S/g, [^Sqgbq Raju,.Occ. Dentist, Aged about 45 ye..ars.,.R/9 Prithvi-604, Survey^No 79, My Home NawaO*eepi, ti",r Hii;;h City. Madhapur. Hyderabad-500081 (T S.) ...PETITIONER AND 1. Principal chief commissioner of rncome Tax, Andhra pradesh and ^ Tetqn.Salt 1oth Ftoor, D Btock, tT Towers, A.C. CrirOi, nvJLrid#E6OO&] 2. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Unit-lv. tiru;ati. 3- lnspector of Police, Ramagiri Circte, Anantapui Distrlct. 4. Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax, centrar circle, centrar circre-i(4), Hyderabad. 5. !-lnion of lndia, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, North Brock, New Delhi. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to lssue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particurarry in the nature of writ of Mandamus- a) Decrare the action of the Respondents in seizing Rs.1,27,00,000/- of the Petitioners tvloney vide panchanama dated 21to212019 as illegal and contrary to the provisions of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 ard lndian Penal Cod-e, 1 860 and Criminat procedure Code, 1973. b) Direct the Respondents to release Rs.1 ,27,00,000/- to the petitioner from its custody. c) Restrain the Respondents from conducting any further enquiry with respect to {he money seized vide Panchanama dated 21to2t201g. d) rmpose Heavy costs on the Respondents for the illegality committed by them

lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supportlof the petifion, the High Co.rrt may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps zgainst the Petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ROHIT POGULA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1,2&4: Ms. M. KIRANMAVEE (sc FoR TNCoMETAX ) Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI GADI PRAVEEN XLMAR, DY. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER I I i I I

ii THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA ///i / .t,i I l I ! I WRIT PETITION No.22431 OF 2O2l ORDER: @et Hon'bte sri Justitt P.Sam Koshg) Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr'Rohit Pogula, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the instant writ petition. 2. As prayed for, the instant r.r'rit petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA A SISTANT REGISTRAR /ffRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER To, t to SR to t\r6. to SRI PUCI I. ROHIT POGULA M. KIRANMAYEE( SC FOR I |\,4ETAX ) toPUCl I I { 1. One CC , Advocate o UC] 2. OneCC 3. One CC GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF rNDrA{O OR HOME, High Cou( for the State of Telangana, at 4. Two CCs to GP F Hyderabad [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies BM %- t I .t i I I I I i I l 1 i j { t

7\. HIGH COURT I I DATED:1210312025t 2 4 SEP ,Uf ",,.'.t \:. +\$..,", --l=::::- ORDER WP.No.22431 ot 2021 rj - DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS W]THDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS ( 2 i i I i ! I t t I :] I t T I ! j i I i i I I l

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →