MR. KIRAN KUMAR VELPULA v. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, PRODDUTUR, INCOME TAX
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Following the same, this Writ Petition is allowed, in terms of the
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 14, 19(1)(g), 226, 265
- Income Tax Act, 1961 ss. 144B, 250
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 1975/2026 Between:
1. MR. KIRAN KUMAR VELPULA, S/O MR. VELPULA RAMESWARUDU, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC. DOCTOR, R/O 21/196, MORAGUGI JAMMALAMADUGU, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT - 516 434, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, PRODDUTUR, INCOME TAX CUDDAPAH OFFICE, 24-578, VASANTHAPET, PRODDATUR, DISTRICT-516 360, ANDHRA PRADESH.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TIRUPATI INCOME TAX OFFICE, KT ROAD, TIRUPATI-517501, ANDHRA PRADESH
ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTER, NEW DELHI, ROOM NO 401,2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI - 110 003.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER APPEALS, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC) DELHI, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.1975 of 2026
UNION OF INDIA, , REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 3RD FLOOR, JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, declaration that the Order passed by the 3rd Respondent, u/s 147 r/w Sec. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 22.03.2024, bearing DIN. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1063201718(1), for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20 as confirmed by the order of the 4th Respondent dated 18.09.2025, vide DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1080877665(1), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as arbitrary, illegal, barred by limitation, 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 and Sec 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the Order passed by the 1st Respondent, u/s 147 r/w Sec. 144B Income Tax Act 1961 dated 22.03.2024, bearing DIN.: ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1063201718(1), for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20; as confirmed by the order of the 4th Respondent dated 18.09.2025, vide DIN & Order No.: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080877665(1), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition; and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. Y N VIVEKANANDA 3 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.1975 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner herein had suffered an order of assessment, dated
22.03.2024, for the assessment year 2019-20. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has moved an appeal, which came to be dismissed on 18.09.2025. The petitioner has now approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition contending that the order of assessment as well as the order of appeal would have to be set aside inasmuch as the said process had been undertaken by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer which is impermissible in view of the provisions of Section 151 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, r/w the scheme formulated, by way of a notification, dated 29.03.2022.
3. This issue has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Prameela Pasumarthi vs. CIT 1. The Division Bench, after considering the said issues, had, by its Judgment, dated 28.10.2025, had set aside the notices on the ground that the said notices are contrary to Section 151 A of the I.T. Act. 1 2025 SCC OnLine AP 4052 4 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.1975 of 2026
Operative part
4. Following the same, this Writ Petition is allowed, in terms of the Judgment passed in Prameela Pasumarthi vs. CIT2 and the impugned order of assessment, dated 22.03.2024, and the order of appeal, dated 18.09.2025 are hereby set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J Date: 27.01.2026 MJA ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J 2 2025 SCC OnLine AP 4052 5 RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.1975 of 2026 170 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 1975/2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
27.01.2026 MJA
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Following the same, this Writ Petition is allowed, in terms of the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 14, 19(1)(g), 226, 265; Income Tax Act, 1961 — ss. 144B, 250; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 27 Jan 2026. The bench was R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, T C D SEKHAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.