The High Court of Telangana disposed of Writ Petition No. 33788 of 2010 filed by Mavaslnfra Ltd. challenging an income tax notice as being illegal and without jurisdiction, holding the writ petition to be infructuous and dismissing it without costs.
Writ petition disposed of as having become infructuous without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[346s ]
IN THE HIGH COURTFOR THESTATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SIXTHDAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND ANDTWENTYSIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICEP.SAM KOSHY AND
THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE SUDDALACHALAPATHIRAO
WRIT PETITIO N NO:33788 OF 2010
Between:
Mav4aslnfraLtd.,ACompanyincorporatedundertheprovisions.of-theCompanies A;1;lth ii; nEgo offii"3'c floor" Amosh Plaza, No 6-3 11186/5/4 Besumpet' ftyOeraUaO, Rep-6yits General Manager,(Legaland Contracts)
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndiaprayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court maybe pleasedtoissueawritinthenatureoflt4andamusoranyotherwrit,orderor direction declaringthat the notrcedt. 2.4.2OO9 issued u/s. 148 of the lncomeTax assessment of thePetitionerfor the Act, 1961reoPening the lncomeTax assessmentyear 2005-06as illegal' arbitrary,. unreasonableand without jurisdiction and without fulfillmentof the conditions precedentfor issue of the said notice
l.A. NO: 1 OF 201O(WPMP. NO:42800 oF 2010)
Petrtion under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci- umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court r; y be pleased to stay all further proceedings in the matter of reassessment of lre petitioner for the assessment year 2005-06 pursuant to the impugned not c€ dt. 2.4.2009 issued ui s. 1 48 of the l.T. Act.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. SAGARIKA KONERU, REPF ESENTING SRI Y. RATNAKAR
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. SUDHAKAR REDDY SENIOR S,C. FOR ItI )OME TAX
The Court made the following: ORDER
1 i ! I
HONOI]RABLE SIII JT]STICE P.SAM KOSHY ANI)
HON'BLE SItl Jt sl'lcFl StrDt)Al,A CHALAPA'IHI RAO
\4rlll'l' l'}E]'lTlON No.3378ll of 2010 I)alc:06.1)l .2026
llet!veerr:
Min tas Infia Ltd.. llr.lcrirhld
. . . Pctitioner
;ltl
Ihc Dr,.C'onrnrissiott,.r rti'Itteolttt lltr.. IIrdctlthltlittttl anothcr
. . .llcspondents
OItDER:(1tcr llorthit .\r'l .lrr:'iit't' l'.-,,i",Krtslt.t;
Ms.sagarika i'.,,lictti iilli'llC(l.rLrullSClrcllt-cscntingMr.Y liatnakar. lcarned cotLnscI lor pcl.itiotrcr'. stt[;ttti1.that tho causeol' actiondoesnot
srrrvir.e an)' firrthcr irnd tlrr' 'rrit pctitr,:, .:ttt bc :lecortlingll disposed of.
l. Accordingll. thc \'rit Petitionillrtlds disposcdof as havingbecome
inlittctttous. I hore shell hct,o ortlcl ll:L,) costs
Irendipg r.uiscella11c6rrs upltlicaiirrrrs.i1'an1. sha[[ stautl closed
sD/ .BHAVANI SWAMY S TANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPYII
To
-a':':=4
l I I
HIGH COURT
DAI- iD:06 lO112026|
I
t Un Tt-iE s; ,l
\ J. 05 '!/\ -.. l
(-t I
t
.{)r- 1-
ORDER
WP.N<:33788 of 2010
DISPOSING OF THE / /RIT PETITION AS I{FRUCTUOUS WI-'HOUT COSTS
t-
v
Mavaslnfra Ltd.
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -9
P.SAM KOSHY
SUDDALACHALAPATHIRAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
