SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 2172

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, JJ. 
M/s Mandava Holdings Private Limited – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Rep. by its Secretary and others – Respondents
W.P.No.21770 of 2024 
Decided On : 01-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P Soma Shekar Reddy
For the Respondent: Deputy Solicitor General of India

Writ petitions are not maintainable when an effective statutory appellate remedy exists, as reaffirmed by case law.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 14A, 143(1), 143(3), 153-A, 260-A - Writ of Certiorari - Challenge to assessments made without jurisdiction as per Supreme Court ruling in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell - Effective remedy of appeal available, thus writ petition not maintainable - Judicial precedents emphasized. (Paras 6, 12, 18, 22)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Not maintainable when an efficacious statutory remedy exists, as established in Chhabil Dass Agarwal - Writ jurisdiction must be exercised in exceptional circumstances. (Paras 12, 18, 21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a non-banking financial company, contested assessment orders issued after a search operation, claiming lack of jurisdiction and improper application of law by the authorities. (Paras 2-6)

Findings of Court:
The Writ Petition is dismissed for being devoid of merits, as statutory remedy under Section 260-A of the Act existed and was not pursued. (Paras 22-23)

Issues: The court examined whether the writ jurisdiction can be invoked in light of applicable legal principles and the existence of alternative remedies. (Paras 12, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reinforced that the availability of a statutory appeal under Section 260-A renders the invocation of writ jurisdiction inappropriate, in line with established legal standards. (Paras 12, 18, 22)

Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

Suddala Chalapathi Rao, J.

The present Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer:

“1) issue a Writ, Order of Direction more particularly, in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, setting aside the Orders of the Lower Authorities as lacking in jurisdiction, being against the law laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell;

2) set aside the consequent orders and proceedings for recovery of demand including the consequent penalties levied;

3) and to pass such other order…”

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner is a non- banking financial company registered as a Core Investment Company with the Reserve Bank of India under Registration No. N-09.00438. It filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 on 17.10.2016, admitting a loss of Rs.89,88,52,472/-, which was processed under Section 143 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), accepting the returned loss.

3. Further, a search and seizure operation was conducted on 04.01.2018 in the Group of M/s Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, which also covered the petitioner’s company. Pursuant thereto, a notice under Section 153 -A of the Act was issued on 22.01.2019 and in response to it, the petitioner filed its return for the assessment year 2016-17 on 16.02.2019, declaring the loss of Rs.89,88,52,472/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143 (3) read with Section 153 -A of the Act on 30.12.2019, making an addition of Rs.20,44,42,762/- towards disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, and assessed the loss at Rs.40,97,70,767/- by passing appropriate orders.

4. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (for short ‘CIT(A)’) in Appeal No.10362/2019-20 for the assessment year 2016-17. The CIT(A), by order, dt.08.12.2021, affirmed the assessment order and assailing the same, the petitioner filed a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘ ITA T’) in No.26/HYD/2022. Further, for the subsequent assessment year of 2017-18, for similar disallowance by the Assessing Authority, which was affirmed by the CIT(A), the petitioner filed an appeal in No.27/HYD/2022.

5. Both orders of the CIT(A) were challenged before the learned ITA T and the learned T, after appreciating the evidence on record dismissed both the said appeals i.e., .No.26/HYD/2022 and .No.27/HYD/ 2022, by a common order, dt.26.09.2022, affirming the orders of the CIT(A).

6. Now in the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner assails the order passed by the learned ITA T in .No.26/HYD/2022, dt.26.09.2022, inter alia contending that the lower Appellate Authorities and the Assessing Authority have erroneously passed the orders without appreciating the factual issues in proper perspective and failed to consider the orders of the Hon’ble Apex Court in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. , (2023) SCC Online SC 481 = (2024) 2 SCC 433 and prayed to set aside the order of learned T in .No.26/HYD/2022, dt.26.09.2022 and also the orders of both the CIT(A) and Assessing Authority.

7. The respondents filed a counter affidavit contending that since an effective alternate remedy of appeal under Section 260 -A of the Act is available before this Court, filing of the Writ Petition amounts to abuse of process of law and a misuse of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further stated that the present Writ Petition is not maintainable, as there is no arbitrariness, excess of jurisdiction, or violation of the principles of natural justice, and that the plea of lack of jurisdiction and alleged violation of natural justice is merely an attempt to bypass the statutory appellate remedy by making a feeble attempt to indirectly achieve what they could not achieve directly. The respondents also point out that the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in PCIT’s case (supra) was delivered on 24.04.2023 i.e., subs

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top