Deepak Mundada vs. Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/30227/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01057586202507 October 2025Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department reported no objection to this request. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No order was made as to costs. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed.

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 2017-18. The petitioner also challenged a notice under Section 148 dated 31.03.2021. The petitioner contended that these were issued by the Joint Assessing Officer (1st Respondent) instead of the Facilitation Assessing Officer (3rd Respondent), rendering them void, illegal, and contrary to the principles of natural justice. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Hyderabad, the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, AP & TS, and the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessment Order dated 03.03.2022 and the notice under Section 148 dated 31.03.2021, issued by the Joint Assessing Officer (1st Respondent) instead of the Facilitation Assessing Officer (3rd Respondent), are void, illegal, and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice, as per the Income Tax Act and constitutional provisions? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order and notice were void, illegal, and contrary to the principles of natural justice because they were issued by the incorrect authority (JAO instead of FAO). Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department reported no objection to the petitioner's request.

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 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION NO: 30227 OF 2025 Between: AND 1 2. J Deepak [\/undada, S/o Sai Jagdish Prasad lt4undada Aged about 42 years, Occ. Business 15-9-134, Near Ganesh Temple lvlahara.j gunj. Hyderabad- 500001 ..PETITIONER lncome Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Hyderabad lT Towers. AC Guards Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500004 The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax. AP & TS, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad -500004 Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre lncome Tax Department, Ivlinistry of Finance, Room No. 401 . 2nd Floor, E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. Delhi- 1 10003 ...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, 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 u/s 147 rlw section 1448 of the lnconre Tax Act for A.Y. 2017- 1B vide DIN No. ITBA/A.ST/S/147/2021-2211040302805(1) and the notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2021 vide DIN No ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21t1O32032203(1), issued by the JAO (1st Respondent) instead of FAO (3rd Respondent) as void, illegal and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justtce.

IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'1 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 proceedrngs pursuant to the Assessment Order dated 03 03.2022 passed by the 3'd respondent u/s 147 rtw section 1448 of the lncome Tax Act for AN 2017-'lB vide DIN No ITBA/ASTlst147 12021-22l'1040302805(1) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. PARIKSHITH KUTUR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI B. SAPNA REDDY (Sr SC FOR INCOME TAx) The Court made thr: following: ORDER ( __--......-- €

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.3O227 of 2025 ORDER: Learned counsel Sri I(. Parikshith arppears for the petitioner. Ms. Bokaro Sapna Recldl', lcarned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department, appears for the respondents 2. The writ petition is prefcrrecl lirr the follon ing prayer: "For the rcasons st2ltcd in the zrccompan; ing affidavit it is prayed that this I lon'ble Court may bc pleased to issue a Writ ol Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dated 03.03.2022 passed by the 3.,1 respondent u/s. i47 r/w section l44B of thc Incomc Ta-r Act for A.Y.2O17-18 vide DIN No.ITBA/ASllSI147 /2021- 22 /lO4O3O2aOs(ll and the noticc u/s 148 dated 31.03.2021 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/S lAa/2o2O- 2l /1O32O322O3(1), issued by the JAO (1", respondent) instead of FAO (3.d respondent) as void, illegal and contrary to the principles of natural justice and pass such other order(s) as this I{onblc Court may dcem fit :rnd proper in the circumstances of the casc."

l 3. Learnerl counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to u,ithdrau t he n rit petition. L Lear:rcrl Senior Stariding Cotrnsel lor Income 'I'a-x Departmcr I t appearing lor the respondents reporls t1() objection. 5. Accordingly, the u,rit petition is dismisscd as s'ithdraq'n. There shall bc no order as to costs. Misccllzrneous applications pending, if an-v, shall stancl closc'd. SD/.M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASS I'ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' S CTION OFFICER B I\,1 BS I To, 1. One CC to SRl. PARIKSHITH KUTUR, Advocate [OPUC] i. o;; cc io shr E, sAPNA REDDY, (Sr sc FoR INCoME rAX) [oPUC] 3 Two CD CoPies ( W, Eryr- \\

HIGH COURT DATED:071101'.r-025 ORDER WP.No.30227 of 2025 Xx [tT p5 ( o$ r HE S l4 3 O * -^ I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS 5 \ ..t 1b a,lil '!/ - ,"a // ")/ 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 →