PACS BIDRELLY HQ MUDHOLE vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court allowed IA No. 1 of 2026, thereby reviving Writ Petition No. 33527 of 2024. The Court reasoned that the Supreme Court, in its decision dated 10.04.2026 concerning faceless proceedings, had remitted all such matters to the respective High Courts, permitting 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 Supreme Court's decision, and the Supreme Court had indeed remitted the matters, the Court found a strong case for revival. The writ petition is therefore restored for fresh adjudication. No costs were awarded.
What were the facts?
This case involves an application (IA No. 1 of 2026) filed by the Income Tax Department (Petitioners) seeking the revival of Writ Petition No. 33527 of 2024. The original writ petition was filed by PACS BIDRELLY HQ MUDHOLE (Respondent) concerning Assessment Year 2018-19. The High Court had previously disposed of the writ petition, granting liberty to either party to move for revival based on the outcome of matters pending before the Supreme Court concerning faceless proceedings. The present application is filed in light of a Supreme Court decision dated 10.04.2026 in a batch of cases related to faceless proceedings, which remitted such matters to respective High Courts.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Writ Petition No. 33527 of 2024, previously disposed of by this Court, should be revived for fresh adjudication in light of the Supreme Court's decision dated 10.04.2026 in the faceless batch matters. (Question of procedure/mixed law and fact, turning on the implications of the Supreme Court's order). Assessee's Contention (Implicit in filing the IA): The Supreme Court's decision in the faceless batch matters, which remitted similar cases to High Courts for questioning the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, warrants the revival of this writ petition. Revenue's Contention (Implicit in filing the IA): The Supreme Court's order provides a basis for the revival of the writ petition, as the High Court had granted liberty to seek revival subject to such an outcome.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
13447 1 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 SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA lA.No.1 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 33527 OF 2024 Between: 1. The lncome Tax Officer Ward 1, Nirmal/ lncome Tax Office, Nirmal, Nirmal, Hyderabad 504101 , Telangana. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Telangana and A.p, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 50002g, Telangana. 3. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, lVinistry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 110 001. 4. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Govemment, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 1'10 0Ol . ...PETITIONERS AND PACS BIDRELLY HQ MUDHOLE, Rep. by the CEO NADTPOLLA SAYA REDDY, S/o. NADIPOLLA RAMULU, Aged about 52 years, Occupation. Business, Fyo. 4 '16 NEAR BUS STAND, MUDHOLE, ADTLABAD SO41OZ, Telangana, lndia. PAN. AACAPTl 72R, Assessment Year. 20'18-19 ...RESPONDENT Petition under Section '15l 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 28.04.2025 in WP No 33527 ol 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, SENTOR SC FOR TNCOME TAX Counsel for the Respondent: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER lA No.1 of 2026 is filed by the respondenUlncome Tax Department seeking for the restoration of present writ petition No.33527 ol 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 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 lhe 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 gupreme 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 revivar of the present writ petition has also been made out. Accordingly, lA No.1 of 2O26 stands allowed. SD/- M.NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (_v To SECTION OFFICER Ms. PACS BIDRELLY HQ MUDHOLE, Rep. by the CEO NAD|POLLA SAYA REDDy, S/o NAD|pOLLA RAMULU Aged about 52 years, Occupation. Business, Rlo 4 16 NEAR BUS STAND, MUDHOLE, nOfLnenD iiaid2, rera nsa na, tndia pAN. AAC Ap7 1 7_2R, Ar.;r;;;ni; ar. 20 1 B_1 9 The Section Officer, Writ D Terangana, at Hyderabad. )ivision Bench Section, High court ioiine strte or one CC to SRr THANNERU CHAITANyA KUMAR, Advocate IOPUCJ 2 3
4 5 PSK. TKS One CC to Ms. J.SUNITHA, SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX [OPUC] Two CD Copies
HIGH COURT DATED: 0510812026 ORDER lA.No.1 OF 2026 IN WP.No.33527 of 2024 ALLOWING THE IA AND RESTORING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS NOTE: LIST ON 27.08.2026 1 [ tuB 2028 5c) ..;.' .io* 1,3E 5TAf6' D ) ) i..t\\ 9z * 5 PAT
More judgments on Section 147-A
- Pushkar Vishwas, Bulandshahr vs Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3), BulandshahrITA 5661/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: Disposed11 Nov 2025AY 2011-12
- Jaivir, Sonepat vs Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, SonepatITA 3275/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
- Impressions Services Private Limited, Delhi vs ADIT Circle 10(1), DelhiITA 3275/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed5 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
- Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Sadhuram G AndaniITR/103/19955 Dec 2014
- C.I.T vs Motichand Virpal ShahITR/36/20037 Nov 2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Alok Kumar Sethi, Bhubaneswar vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 10 Nov 2026
- Natuk Mra vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 OrsGauhati · 10 Nov 2026
- Tatvam Procon Private Limited, Gujarat vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 10 Nov 2026
- Swapna Acharya vs. Superintendent, GST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar-1Orissa · 10 Nov 2026
- M/S. Ashok Panda, Dhenkanal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax , CT And GST Circle, DhenkanalOrissa · 10 Nov 2026