Spartek Ceramics India Limited vs The Additional Joint Deputy Assistant ...

Also reported in

This judgment disposed of connected matters. The same reasons were delivered in the following 3 cases.

Mr. Kishan Kumar Thotakura vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

Smt Prameela Pasumarthi vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Mrs.Nusrat Shazia, vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 141,

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

These writ petitions were filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, challenging orders and notices issued under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for various assessment years. The petitioners, including individuals such as Smt. Prameela Pasumarthi and Mr. Sesharao Ghantasala, as well as corporate entities, challenged these orders and notices as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void ab initio, and violative of the principles of natural justice.

The petitioners further contended that the impugned orders and notices were violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The prayer in each petition sought a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the respective orders and notices as invalid and setting them aside.

The batch of writ petitions raised common questions of law concerning the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and were heard together by a Division Bench comprising Hon'ble Sri Justice G. Narendar and Hon'ble Smt. Justice Hiranmayee Mandava.

Catchwords: Income Tax · Reassessment · Section 148 · Section 148A · Writ of Mandamus · Article 226 · Natural Justice · Article 14 · Article 19(1)(g) · Article 265 · Void ab initio