| |
CDJ 2026 TSHC 045
|
| Court : High Court for the State of Telangana |
| Case No : Writ Petition No. 32774 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN |
| Parties : M/s. The A.P. High Court Cooperative Credit Society Limited Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad & Others |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, Advocate. For the Respondent: K Sudhakar Reddy, (Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax). |
| Date of Judgment : 27-01-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Subject
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India
- Income Tax Act, 1961
- Circular No.13 of 2023, dated 26.07.2023, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes
2. Catch Words:
- Writ of Mandamus
- Condonation of delay
- Natural justice
- Arbitrary
- Illegal
- Void‑ab‑initio
- Infructuous
3. Summary:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to set aside the Income Tax Department’s order dated 26‑06‑2025 rejecting his application for condonation of delay in filing the return for AY 2020‑21. He alleged that the order was arbitrary, illegal, violative of natural justice and contravened Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265 of the Constitution, the Income Tax Act, 1961 and CBIT Circular No.13 of 2023. The respondent contended that the delay had already been condoned, rendering the petition moot. The Court found that the cause of action had become infructuous. Consequently, the petition was dismissed without any order as to costs, and any pending applications were closed.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. Sri Vighnesh Asawa, learned counsel appears for Sri A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri K. Sudhakar Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appears for respondents.
2. This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer:
“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction declaring that order passed by the 1st Respondent, dated 26.06.2025, bearing DIN.: ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1077828901(1) for the Assessment Year 2020-21, in rejecting the application, filed by the Petitioner; seeking condonation of delay in filing its Return of Income; as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India & the Income Tax Act, 1961, and to consequently set aside the same, after declaring that the same is in violation of Circular No.13 of 2023, dated 26.07.2023, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent Income Tax Department has already condoned the delay in filing the petitioner’s Return of Income. As such, the cause in the present Writ Petition has become infructuous.
4. Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
|
| |
