John Foundation, vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,

PDF · subscribers
WP/23438/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01046318202507 August 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the application for restoration (IA No. 1 of 2026), finding a strong case for revival of the writ petitions. This was based on the Supreme Court's decision dated 10.04.2026, which remitted matters to High Courts to permit challenges to the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. The Court reasoned that since the Supreme Court itself remitted such matters, the present writ petitions should also be revived. The impleadment and amendment applications were also allowed, recognizing the proposed respondent as a necessary and proper party and permitting the amendments in line with the Supreme Court's directive. The Court granted an interim stay, as prayed for, until the next date of hearing, mirroring the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court in batch matters concerning the faceless assessment scheme. The writ petitions were then directed to be listed before the appropriate bench.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department (respondent) filed applications (IA No. 1 of 2026) seeking restoration of five writ petitions (W.P.Nos. 23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025) that were previously disposed of. The basis for restoration was a Supreme Court decision on 10.04.2026 concerning faceless assessment proceedings, which remitted matters to respective High Courts to allow petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. The High Court had previously granted liberty to parties to seek revival post-Supreme Court outcome. Additionally, applications were filed to implead a party respondent and amend the petitions, both linked to the Supreme Court's directive. The Court allowed these applications.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petitions, previously disposed of, should be revived for hearing on the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in light of the Supreme Court's decision dated 10.04.2026. (Question of law) 2. Whether a proposed party is a necessary and proper party to the proceedings, necessitating their impleadment. (Question of fact and law) Assessee (Petitioner) Contentions: The petitions were filed to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court's decision on 10.04.2026, remitting similar matters to High Courts, provides a basis for revival and amendment of the petitions. The petitioners sought interim protection similar to that granted by the Supreme Court. Revenue (Respondent) Contentions: The respondent filed an application for restoration of the writ petitions, citing the Supreme Court's decision which allows for the constitutional validity of Section 147-A to be challenged in High Courts. The respondent also supported the impleadment and amendment applications.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA MAIN CASE No: W.P.Nos. 23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025

PROCEEDINGS SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE

15.10.2026 HACJ (PSK,J) & SCR,J

Counsel for the petitioners: Mr. A V Raghu Ram.

Counsel for the respondents : Mr.N.Praveen Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.

I.A.No.1 of 2026 (Recall Petition) IN W.P.Nos.23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025

IA No.1 of 2026 is filed by the respondent/Income Tax Department seeking for the restoration of these Writ Petitions in terms of recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the faceless batch which was decided on 10.04.2026, whereby the matters were all remitted to the respective High Courts, permitting the petitioners therein to question the Constitutional validity of the provision under Section 147-A of Income Tax Act.

This Court while disposing of the instant writ petition at the first instant, had granted the liberty to the either of the parties to move proper application for revival, subject to the outcome of the matters pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court pertaining to the

Transferred to i/o folder, before corrections, if any.

2 faceless proceedings.

Given the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has itself remitted all those matters pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the respective High Courts. We are of the considered opinion that a strong case for revival of the present writ petition has also been made out. Accordingly, IA No.1 of 2026 stands allowed. I.A.No.2 of 2026 (Implead Petition) IN W.P.Nos.23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025

This application has been filed seeking to implead the proposed respondent as a party respondent in the above writ petitions.

On due consideration of the fact that the instant implead petition has been filed pursuant to the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the faceless batch, decided on 10.04.2026, whereby the matters were remitted to the respective High Courts, permitting the petitioners therein to question the constitutional validity of the provision under Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, this Court is of the view that the proposed respondent is a necessary

3 and proper party to the proceedings.

Accordingly, this application is allowed.

The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendments within a period of ten days from today. I.A.No.3 of 2026 (Amendment Petition) IN W.P.Nos.23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025

Considering the fact that the instant amendment petitions has been filed in terms of recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the faceless batch which was decided on 10.04.2026, whereby the matters were all remitted to the respective High Courts, permitting the petitioners therein to question the Constitutional validity of the provision under Section 147-A of Income Tax Act.

Accordingly, these applications are allowed.

Let necessary amendments be carried out by the petitioners within a period of 10 days from today.

W.P.Nos.23376, 23388, 23434, 23436, 24348 of 2025

List these cases before appropriate Bench

4 having roster.

Meanwhile, Considering the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by its order dated 10.04.2026, granted interim protection in the batch matters pertaining to the faceless assessment scheme, we are also inclined to grant similar interim protection in the present batch cases.

Accordingly, there shall be an interim stay, as prayed for, until the next date of hearing.

____________ HACJ (PSK,J) _______ SCR,J aqs

More judgments on Section 147-A

All 43 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →