Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P. SAM KOSHY, Narsing Rao Nandikonda, JJ
Sesha Reddy Sadda – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. batch of writ petitions challenges issuance of notices under 148. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. case for consideration on faceless assessment in central charges. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments regarding jurisdiction and procedure for assessment. (Para 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. clarification on applicable law and procedural requirements for notices. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. importance of adhering to faceless procedures as established by previous judgements. (Para 20 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. final ruling on quashing of notices for failure to comply with mandated procedures. (Para 30 , 31) |
COMMON ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)
These are batch of writ petitions involving the same issue. Therefore, they are clubbed together and are being decided by this common order.
2. Heard Mr. A. Narasimha Sarma, learned Additional Solicitor of India. Ms. Rutuja Pawar, learned counsel, along with Mr. Dundu Sashank Manmohan, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667 of 2024; Mr. A.V. Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition Nos.28497 and 26788 of 2024; Mr. Mohd. Mukhairuddin, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.12437 of 2
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
