Mr.Surender Goud Shankarmpet, vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax,

PDF · subscribers
WP/8920/2025HC TelanganaHBHC01017758202524 April 2025Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed I.A. No. 1 of 2026 and recalled the earlier order dated 24.04.2025 passed in WP.No.8920 of 2025. 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 and explicitly permitted petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Given that the High Court had previously granted liberty to the parties to move for revival pending the Supreme Court's decision, and the Supreme Court had now remitted these matters, the Court found a strong case for recalling its earlier order. The operative direction was the allowance of the interlocutory application and the recall of the previous order.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department (Petitioners) filed an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026) before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad, seeking to recall an order dated 24.04.2025 passed in Writ Petition No. 8920 of 2025. The original writ petition was filed by Mr. Surender Goud Shankarmpet (Respondent/Petitioner). The Department's application was based on a recent decision of the Supreme Court dated 10.04.2026, which dealt with a batch of cases concerning faceless proceedings. The Supreme Court had remitted these matters to the respective High Courts, allowing petitioners to question the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court had previously disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the parties to seek revival subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court matters.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order dated 24.04.2025 passed in WP.No.8920 of 2025 should be recalled in light of the Supreme Court's decision dated 10.04.2026 concerning faceless proceedings and the constitutional validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee (Mr. Surender Goud Shankarmpet) in this interlocutory application. The application was filed by the Income Tax Department. Revenue's Contention: The Income Tax Department (Petitioners) contended that the Supreme Court's decision dated 10.04.2026, which remitted matters to High Courts and permitted challenges to Section 147-A, necessitates the recalling of the earlier High Court order. They relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in the 'faceless batch' of cases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

13447 | IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA tA. NO. 1 0F 2026 IN WRIT PETITIONN O: 8920 OF 2025 Between: 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 6 (1), Hyderabad' lncome Tax Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank,Hyderabad-500004' 2. The Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax lncome Tax Towers' AC Guards Masab Tank, HYderabad-500004. 3. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax, Department National Faceless Assessment centre Room, No,401, 2nd Floor ERamp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium' Delhi 110003 ...'ET'r'.NERS/RESP.NDENTS AND Mr.Surender Goud Shankarmpet, S/o' Late Sri Shankar Goud Shankarampet' A;"J 62years H.No.7-1-2821C11t119, Balkampet, Hvderabad 500018' Telangana. .,.RESPONDENT/PETITIONER PetitionunderSectionlslCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedinthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Recallirevive the orders dt.-24-O4-2O25 passed in w.p. tto. 8920 of 2025 to file of thisHon,bleCourtforfreshadjudicationinlightoftheorderdated10.04.2026 pu.r"J ov the Hon,ble supreme'court in lncome Tax Officer, ward 2('1), Chandigarh [-oi.. u. iej partap singh and connected batch matters, in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. SHAIK VAHEEDA SUSHMA Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (Sr. Sc for income tax) The Court made the following: ORDER 1

f l.A.No.1 of 2026 is filed by the respondenUlncome Tax Department seeking for the recalling the order, dated 24.04.2025, in WP.No.8920 of 2025 in terms of recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the faceless batch which was decided r>n 10.04.2026, whereby the matters were all remitted to the respective High Courts, permitting the petitioners therein to question the constitutional validil:y of the provision under Section 147-A of lncome Tax Act, 1961. This Court wl'ile disposing of the instant writ petition at the first instant, had granted the liberrty to the either of the parties to move proper application for revival, subject 1:o the outcome of the matters pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court pert:rining to the faceless proceedings. Given the facrt that the Hon'ble Supreme 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 recalling the order dated 24.1J4.2025 has also been made out. Accordingly, lA No.1 of 2026 stands allowed and the earlier order stands recalled. //TRUE COPY/i SD/. B. REKHA RANI ASSrsrANr rEGlsrRAR seczA-orercen To, 1. The Commiss oner of lncome Tax, Circle 6 (1), Hyderabad, lncome Tax Towers, AC Guards, Itrlasab Tank, Hyderabad-500004. 2. The Chief Corrmissioner of lncome Tax lncome Tax Towers, AC Guards Masab Tank, Flyderabad-500004. 3. The Assessnrent Unit, lncome Tax Department National Faceless Assessment C;entre Room, No 4Ol , 2nd Floor E-Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi 110003. 4. The Section Officer, Wdt Division Bench, Section High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad 5. The Section Officer, Posting Section , High Court for the State of Telangana , Hyderabad 6. One CC to Ms. SHAIK VAHEEDA SUSHMA Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to [vls. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (Sr. SC FOR INCOIVE TAX) loPUCl 8. Two CD Copies Bm GJP ?

HIGH COURT DATED: 09/09/2026 ORDER l.A. No. 1 OF 2026 IN WP.No.8920 o12025 I.A. IS ALLOII/ED rtd{i* -1.? 2 DRAFTS HE Si47 ,? or' ( '+ 1 d z 4 srp2o26 ( -t' * u\oq lb

More judgments on Section 147-A

All 43 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147-A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →