M/s Bharat Tubes and Tin Printers vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

PDF · subscribers
WP/29366/2024HC TelanganaHBHC01057028202429 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed I.A. No. 1 of 2026, thereby reviving Writ Petition No. 29366 of 2024. The Court reasoned that the Supreme Court, in its decision dated 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. v. Tej Partap Singh, had remitted all matters concerning faceless proceedings to the respective High Courts. This Supreme Court order specifically permits petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. Given that the High Court had previously granted liberty to move for revival subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court matters, and the Supreme Court has now remitted these matters, the Court found a strong case for revival. The operative direction is that I.A. No. 1 of 2026 stands allowed, and the writ petition is revived for fresh adjudication. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department, through the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others, filed an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026) seeking to revive Writ Petition No. 29366 of 2024. This writ petition was initially disposed of by the High Court with liberty to the parties to seek revival based on the outcome of matters pending before the Supreme Court concerning faceless proceedings. The Supreme Court, in its decision dated 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. v. Tej Partap Singh, remitted all such matters to the respective High Courts, allowing petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. The present application is filed in light of this Supreme Court order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present Writ Petition No. 29366 of 2024 should be revived for fresh adjudication in light of the Supreme Court's order dated 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. v. Tej Partap Singh. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (M/s Bharat Tubes and Tin Printers) in this interlocutory application. However, the filing of the application by the Revenue implies the assessee would likely support the revival. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue (Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others) contended that the Supreme Court's decision in the faceless batch of cases, specifically the order dated 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. v. Tej Partap Singh, has remitted matters to the High Courts. This order permits petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, a strong case for revival of the present writ petition has been made out.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

134471 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P,SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA I.A.NO.1 0F 2026 IN wRIT PETITION NO: 29366 OF 2024 Between: '1. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad, l.T. Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana 2. Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department, National e Assessment Center New Delhi Room No. 401 2nd FlooiE Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium New Delhi 3. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax 1 Hyderabad, l. T Towers AC Guards Masab Tank Hyderabad. ....PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND M/s Bharat Tubes and Tin Printers, Room No.- 613, 6th Floor, Taramandal Complex, Saifabad, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana. Represented by its Partner, Mr. Aditya Kedia, S/o. Mr. Om Prakash Kedia ..... RESPONDENTAA/RIT PETITION ER Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to revive/recall the order daled 29.04.2025 passed in w.P. No. 29366/2024 for fresh adjudication in light of the Order dated '10.04.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in lncome Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. v. Tej Partap Singh.

This petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the :etition, affidavit and Memorandum of grounds in support thereof, and upon hearirg the arguments of SRI A.V.A.SIVA KARTIKEYA, Counsel for the Petitioners SRI K.SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX on behalf of Respondents., The Court made the following: ORDER l.A.No.1 ol 2026 is filed by the respondent / lnco le Tax Department seeking for the restoration of present Writ Petition No.29366 of 2024 in terms of recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the faceless batch which was decided on 10-4-2026, whereby the mafters 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 lncome 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 facelesd 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, l.A.No.1 of 2026 stands allowed. //TRUE COPY// '1 . The Partner, Mr. Aditya Kedia, S/o. Mr. Om Prakash Kedia, M/s Bharat Tubes and Tin Printers, Room No.- 613,61h Floor, Taraman,ial Complex, Saifabad, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad, l.T. Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana 3. Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department, National e Assessment Center New Delhi Room No. 401 2nd Floor E Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium New Delhi. 4. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax 1 Hyderabad, l. T. Towers AC Guards Masab Tank Hyderabad. SD/- AHMED ABDULLAH KHAN AqSISTANT REGISTRAR 4,..\\N '.j )iclonr oFFrciR To

5.

The section officer, D.B. section, High court for the State of rerangana at Hyderabad. 6. The section officer, Posting Section, High court for the State of relangana at Hyderabad. 7. One CC to SRt A.V.A.S|VA KART|KEYA, Advocate tOpUCl 8. ONE CC tO SRI K.SUDHAKAR REDDY, SENIOR STANDINIG COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX, Advocate tOpUCl 9. Two CD Copies SA TKSN

HIGH COURT DATED: 0510812026 List on 27-8-2026 ORDER r.A.NO.1 0F 2026 IN WP.No.29366 of 2024 ALLOWING THE I.A. T --: € ) )) V ? [ t{rt ?'ut t:: frl a.==, ,al.lrr r)]\ *

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 →