PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. The income tax officer ward 1

PDF · subscribers
WP/31072/2024HC TelanganaHBHC01060324202428 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed IA No.1 of 2026, thereby reviving Writ Petition No. 31072 of 2024. The Court reasoned that the Supreme Court's decision in the faceless proceedings batch matters, which remitted cases to respective High Courts to permit challenges to the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, directly impacted the present case. Given that the original writ petition was disposed of with liberty to seek revival pending the Supreme Court's outcome, and the Supreme Court has now provided a clear direction, a strong case for revival has been made out. The operative direction is the allowance of the IA, leading to the revival of the writ petition for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department (Petitioners) filed an interlocutory application (IA No.1 of 2026) seeking the revival of Writ Petition No. 31072 of 2024. The original writ petition was disposed of earlier, with liberty granted to either party to move for 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 and connected batch matters, remitted 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 IA is filed in light of this Supreme Court order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present Writ Petition No. 31072 of 2024 should be revived for fresh adjudication in light of the Supreme Court's order dated 10.04.2026 in the faceless proceedings batch matters, specifically concerning the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. Assessee's Contentions (Implicitly through the IA and arguments): The assessee, by filing the IA and arguing for revival, contends that the Supreme Court's decision necessitates a re-examination of the writ petition, as it has opened avenues to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 147-A. They rely on the Supreme Court's order which remitted similar matters to High Courts. Revenue's Contentions (Implicitly through the IA and arguments): The revenue, as petitioners in the IA, supports the revival of the writ petition. They argue that the Supreme Court's directive to remit matters to High Courts for adjudication on the constitutional validity of Section 147-A creates a strong case for reviving the present writ petition.

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 (Special Original Jurisdiction) 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 l.A. No.1 ot 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 31072 OF 2024 Between: 1. The income tax officer ward 1, Adilabad 504001 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax-Telangana and A.P, 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, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Ir/inistry of Finance, New Delhi - 110 001 . .,.PETITIONERS AND Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society, Jainad Rep. By CEO G Ganganna, S/o. Ganganna Godda, Occupation: Business, Aged about 47 years, D.NO. 949/1 Jainad, Adilbad 504001 ...RESPONDENT 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 in WP No 31072 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.

This petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. J. SUNITHA, Senior SC FOR INCOME TAX. counsel for the Petitioners and SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR, on behalf of Respondent, The Court made the following: ORDER "IA No.1 ol 1026 is flled by the respondent/Income Tax Department seeking fbr the restoration of present Writ Petition No.31072 of 2024 in terms of recent decision ol thc Hon'ble Supreme Couft in the faceless batch which r.r'as decided on 10.0-1.2026. rvhereby the matters '"r'ere all remitted to the respectir e Hish Ct,uns. permitting the petitioners therein to question the Constitutional validi:y o1'thc provision under Section 147-A of Income Tax Act. This Courr w'hile disposing of the instant u'rit 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 perlaining to the faceless proceedings. Gi', en the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has itself remitted all those matters pending betbrc the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the respective High Courts. We are o I the considered opinion that a strong case for revival of the present ri rit petition has also been made out. Accordingly, IA No.1 of 2026 stands allorved." //TRUE COPY// SD/. M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR \_7 SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The income tax officer ward 1 , Adilabad 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Hyderabad, IT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tan Telangana. 3. The Nationa/ Fac Tax.Tetangana and A.p. k, Hyderabad _500 02g, Delhi eless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New

4.

The Chairman, Department of Revenue, The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 110 001. 5. The Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, The Union of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110 001 . 6. The CEO G Ganganna, S/o. Ganganna Godda, Primary Agricultural Co- Operative Society, Jainad Occupation: Business, Aged about 47 years, D.NO. 949/1 Jainad, Adilbad 50400'l 7. The Section Officer, Writ Posting Section, High Court for the State of Telangana. 8. The Section Officer, Writ DB Section, High Court for the State of Telangana. 9. One CC to SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUIVAR, Advocate [OPUC] 10. One CC to Ms. J. SUNITHA, Senior SC FOR INCOME TAX [OPUC] 1 1 . Two CD Copies BN TKS 4r

HIGH COURT DATED: 0510812026 ORDER l.A. No.1 of 2026 IN WP.No.31072 oI 2024 ALLOWING THE IA., \1 NOTE: LIST ON 27.08.2026 E S AI€ kl J iO \J \ti, 1 B AUE 2O2E :fn _a:_,"tgPAT *, ..',1i.\.1-.// ,-.',,:,. Pz 6; ! G' U{ 1a s6

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 →