PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ADILABAD vs. The Income tax officer ward 1

PDF · subscribers
WP/30595/2024HC TelanganaHBHC01059300202401 May 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026). The Court held that a strong case had been made out for recalling the order dated 01.05.2025. This decision was based on the fact that the Supreme Court itself had remitted all matters pending before it concerning faceless proceedings to the respective High Courts. The Supreme Court's order permitted petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the earlier order of this Court stands recalled. The Court did not explicitly state any issue left undecided, as the application was for recall and revival.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department (Petitioners) filed an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026) seeking to recall an order dated 01.05.2025 passed in Writ Petition No. 30595 of 2024. The original writ petition was filed by Santosh Goud Ampelly (Respondent). The Department's application is based on a recent Supreme Court decision dated 10.04.2026 in a batch of matters concerning faceless proceedings. In that decision, the Supreme Court 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, 1961. This High Court had previously disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the parties to move for revival, pending the outcome of the Supreme Court matters.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order dated 01.05.2025 in W.P. No. 30595 of 2024 should be recalled for fresh adjudication in light of the Supreme Court's order dated 10.04.2026 concerning faceless proceedings and the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention (Implicit, as they are the Respondent in the I.A. and the Petitioner in the original W.P.): The Respondent, Santosh Goud Ampelly, would likely support the recall of the order to allow for fresh adjudication based on the Supreme Court's directive, particularly regarding the constitutional validity of Section 147-A, which was a central issue in the faceless proceedings batch. Revenue's Contention (Petitioner in the I.A.): The Petitioners (Income Tax Department) contend that the Supreme Court's decision to remit matters to High Courts for considering the constitutional validity of Section 147-A necessitates the recall of the earlier order. They argue that the Supreme Court's directive creates a strong case for recalling the order to permit fresh adjudication in line with the apex court's pronouncement.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA l.A.No.1 of 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 30595 OF 2024 Between: 1 . The lncome Tax Officer Ward-1 , Adilabad PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED S/o. Asha Goud Ampelly, O. Dno 2-5-326 TirPellY 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax -.Telangala 11q 4.1' Hyderabad', lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028' Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 4. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Gov6rnment of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 110 001 . 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 1'10 001 . ...PETITIONERS AND ADILABAD, Rep. by CEO Santosh Goud Ampelly-,. Occupation. Businrlss. Aged about 57 years, R/ Street, Adilabad, Adilabad 504001. ...RESPONDENTS 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 dated 01 .05.2025 in wP No 30595 of 2024 for fresh adjudication considering 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 and connected batch matters.

Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms. J.SUNITHA, Sr. SC FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for the Respondent: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER l.A.No.1 ol 2026 is filed by the respondenUlncome Tax Department seeking for the re<;alling the order, dated 01.05.2025, in Wp.No.30595 of 2024 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 valiclity of the provision under section 147-A of lncome Tax Act, 1961 . 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 faceless proceedings. Given the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has itself remitted all those matters pencling before the Hon;ble supreme court to the respective High courts, we are of the considered opinion that a strong case for recalling the order dated 01.05.2025 has also been made out. Accordingly, lA No.i of 2026 stands allowecl and the earlier order stands recalled. SD/- K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT/REGISTRAB \ sEg"rdi orr,"=* 1. The lncome Tax Officer Ward-1, Adilabad. 2 The Principal Strief Commissioner of lncome Tax - Telangana and A.p_, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderadad _ SOb O2A, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. + I_|,q Chairman, Central Board of _ Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Vjliqtg of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat 'Auilaings, Ne* Oef n,-l 110 001. 5. The Secretary to the Government, _ ^Department of Revenue, Ministry of l-inance, New Delhi, Union of lndia- I '10 001. //TRUE COPY// To,

6.

Sri Santosh Goud Ampelly, CEO, S/o. Asha Goud Ampelly, Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society Limited Adilabad, Occupation. Business, Ft/o. D.No.2-5-326, Tirpelly Street, Adilabad, Adilabad 504001. 7. One CC to SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Ms. J.SUNITHA, Sr. SC FOR INCOME TAX [OPUC] 9. One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF INDIA, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OPUC] '10. Two CD Copies BSR.--r rKs'k

2 DRAFTS HIGH COURT DATED: 0210912026 ORDER l.A.No.1 of 2026 IN WP.No.30595 of 2024 1ttE SIA ]J- M L.) P 3 I E S * * '.! I (' \' ALLOWINGTHE I.A. & RECALLING THE ORDER OF W.P. 13cfib -i'? 11loc t16 92. C) Jr

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 →