Deepak Mundada vs. Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/28970/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01057592202525 September 2025Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition, and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department stated there was no objection. Consequently, the Court passed an order dismissing the writ petition as withdrawn, with no order as to costs. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the petitioner's challenge to the assessment order or the notice, as the petition was withdrawn by the petitioner.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Deepak Mundada, filed a Writ Petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The petition challenged an Assessment Order dated 03/03/2022 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner also challenged a notice under Section 148 dated 31/03/2021. The petitioner contended that the notice was issued by the JAO (1st Respondent) instead of the FAO (3rd Respondent) and sought a declaration that the assessment order and notice were void, illegal, and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. The respondents included the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Hyderabad, the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, AP and TS, and the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessment Order dated 03/03/2022 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2016-17 is void, illegal, and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice, specifically concerning the authority that issued the notice under Section 148. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148 dated 31/03/2021 was issued by the JAO (1st Respondent) instead of the FAO (3rd Respondent), rendering the subsequent assessment order void and illegal. The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus to declare these actions as contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department reported no objection to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

+ [ 3488 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY. THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 28970 OF 2025 Between: Deepak Mundada, S/o Sai Jagdish Prasad fVundada, Aged about 42 years, Occ. Business, 15-9-'l 34, Near Ganesh Temple, IVlaharajgunj, Hyderabad- 500001. ...PETITIONER AND 1 lncome Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Hyderabad lT Towers, AC Guards Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500004. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, AP and TS, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, LT.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad -500004. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance Room No. 4O1 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi- '1 10003 Petition under Article 226 o'f 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, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dated 03/03/2022 passed by the 3rd respondent uls 147 r/w section 1448 of the lncome Tax Act for A.Y. 2016-17 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl14712021-2211040302530(1) and the notice u/s 148 dated 3110312021 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14812020- 2111032032206(1), issued by the JAO (1st Respondent) instead of FAO (3rd Respondent) as void, illegal and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. t 4 + 2 3 * $ * t* ...RESPONDENTS

*f * t tt 4 e * + 4 l. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under llection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proc.eedings pursuant to the Assessment Order daled 03/0312O22 passed by the 3rd reslrondent u/s 147 r/w section 1448 of the lncome Tax Act for A.Y 20 1 6 - 17 vide D I N No ITBA/AST I Sl I 47 12021 -2211 040302530( 1 ) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PARIKSHITH KUTUR Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY Sr. SC FOR lT The Court made the following: ORDER { It .f ,,

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE IION'BLE SRI JUSTIC E G.M.MO DIN HIUD WRIT PETITION No.2897O of 2025 ORDER: Mr. Parikshith Kutur, learned counsel lor the petitioner. Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, iearned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appea-rs for the respondents 2. Learnccl counscl for the petitioner se cks permission of Lhis Court to withdranv the instant Writ Petition. 3. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Ta-x Department reports no objection. 4. In vieu, of the above, the instant Writ Petition is dismissed as u'ithdrawn. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/-K.BHAVANI SWAMY SI TANT REGIST //TRUE COPY' TION OFFICER + t To, 1 2 One CC to SRI PARIKSHITH KUTUR, Advocate [OPU One CC to Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY, Sr. SC FOR lT [OPUCI Two CD Copies BSR BS * A, v I I

+* ,, n t DATED:25109t?-025 HIGH COURT , ORDER * WP.No.2897ri of 2025 AS WITHDRA\ryN WITHOUT CO{JTS ltrE ST4 I( ( o.) 3 1 0tT 2q5 t)SSPATCH v.o a a f, t ' DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION ,B , + 6 \ \ \f,' cA I

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →