KAKATIYA UNIVERSITY vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)

WP/6298/2023HC TelanganaHBHC01011629202309 January 2026Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO5 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Appellate Authority had, in the interim, set aside the assessment orders for assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The matter has been remanded back to the faceless authority for fresh assessment. Since the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed by the appellate authority, the court opined that nothing further remained to be adjudicated. The court observed that as the assessment orders were set aside, the demand reflected on the portal against the petitioner should be rectified by the Department at the earliest. With this observation, the writ petition was disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kakatiya University, Warangal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad challenging orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare the orders, identified by DINs ITBA/COM/F11712022-23/1050060693(1) dated 23.02.2023 and ITBA/COM/F11712022-23/1050014547(1) dated 22.02.2023, as bad in law, violative of natural justice, and against CBDT guidelines. The petition also sought a stay on recovery proceedings pursuant to these orders. Subsequently, an interlocutory application was filed seeking to vacate an order dated 10.03.2023 passed in I.A. No. 1 of 2023 in the same writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) are bad in law, violative of the principles of natural justice, and against CBDT guidelines, thereby warranting a writ of mandamus? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and administrative guidelines). 2. Whether recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders should be stayed? (Procedural issue related to the main challenge). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the orders were bad in law, violative of natural justice, and contrary to CBDT guidelines. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus and a stay on recovery proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue's counsel. However, the Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department appeared before the court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

\\ [ 348s I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIi PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO Between: KAKATIYA uNlvERslry, WARANGAL Vidyaranyapuri, Hanamkonda, Telangana _ 506009. Rep. by its Regisirar. .....PETITIONER AND 1. The commissioner of lncome.Tax(Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbag h, Hyderabad, Tela n gi n a_sciO0b+-.' 2 fhe.Deputy Commissioner of .lncome Tax(Exemptions), AayakarBhawan, : Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana-S00b04. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circurnstances 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 order passed by the 1st respondenf vide Document ldentification Number(DlN)- ITBA/COMlFl1712022-2311050060693 (1),dt. 23.02.2023 r/w Document ldentification Number (t}lN)- ITBA/ COMI Fl 171 2022-2311050014547(1),dt. 22.02.2023 as bad in law, vio{ative of Principles of Natural Justice and against CBDT guidelines and instructions. 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 stay \he recovery prcceed\ngs pursuant to the order passed bv the 1st respon'dent

vide Document lde'ntification Number (DlN)- ITBA/ COM/ F t 171 1050060693 (1)' Ot' "'O'' 2OZg"* Oo"u*ent ldentification Number (Dl coM/ F^Ttzozzeglrosoo,+s+ztrri t. zz-o2.2023 ti* the disposat of fit filed before first "-pr,"*"t" authorityltr"*on", Faceless Appeal centre' VidYaranYapun' 2022-23t N)- ITBA/ rst aPPeal Hanamkonda, Telangana - I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Between: , Aayakar Bhavan' , 81:n.l"H5f1 ",ffi "?:[t%"1:ffi 6$:ffiJ3ff ] ' E::.".?"ilv,,r"nn:xr i$fi*5fffi x;J* .' AND [#.iJ'''$"HtY't53S'';-Y;l**"* .....RESPONDENTAAIRIT PETITIONER Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fibd in support of lf oetition, the High court may be pleased to vacate the order dated 10.03.202s p".."0 in l'A' uJ'r ot 2o23in w'P'No'6298 of 2023 Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI DUNDU SASHANK MANIIOHAN GounselfortheRespondents:SRIVIJHAYK.PUNNA(SENtoRScFoRcBlc} The Court made the following ORDER

/ IN TIIE IIIGTI COTJRT FORTIIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT YDERABAI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICB SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.6298 of 2023 Date: 09.01.2026 Between: Kakatiya University, Warangal. Petitioner And The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderaband and another ...Respondents ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr.Dundu Sashank Manmohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Vijhay K.Punna, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Income Tax Department, for the respondents and perused the record- 2. Today, when the matter is hken-up for hearing' learned Standirg Counsel after ascertaining From the Depaftment has confirmedthefactthattheAppettateAuthoritymeanwhilehasset asidetheassessmentordersreferredintheimpugnedorderunder challenge in this writ petition for the assessment years 201t6-20l-7, , t

2 2017-2018 end 2018-2019 and the matter stand now remanded back to the faceless authority for fresh assessment order to be passed. 3. [n view of the same, since the grievance of the petitioner having got redressed from the appellate authority, we are of the considered opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this case ;lt this juncture. However, we would like at this j uncture to observe that since the assessment order itself has been set aside, the demand reflected in the portal against the petitioner may be rectified accordingly by the Department at the earliest. 4. With the aforesaid observation, this Writ petition stands disposecl of. No costs. IVliscellaneous pending, if any, shall stand closed. /,TRUE COPY/' sD/{rtoHo. tsMAtL DEPUTY REGISTRAR 6 To SECTION OFFICER 1. The Conrmissioner of lncome Tax(Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan. - Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana-800004. 2. The.Degruty Commissioner of lncome Tax(Exemptions), AayakarBhawan, ^ Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana-SO0b04. 9. 9n" CC ro SRt DUNDU.SASH4{r.!4lryuquAN, Advocare topucl 4. 9_ry CC to sRtvtJHAy K.PUNNA (SEN|OR SCFOR CBtc) htro#t" [oPUCl 5. Two CC, Copies BS cv

dt t 6 HIGH COU DATED:09'01 t2026 ORDER WP.No.6298 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS rl rJ 1" 1I I B ?02[ * * G: \_/ Iw .LL'p\' .L&

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →