Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/18188/2006 of Galazy maritech Exports (P) Ltd., Vs The Incometax Officer, on 5 January 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3545] TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A . HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT PETITION NO: 18188/2006 Between: 1. GALAXY
APHC010088062006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
WRIT PETITION NO: 18188/2006
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. GALAXY MARITECH EXPORTS (P) LTD.,, 1-142-334, SIVAGANGA, KALEKHANPET, MACHILIPATNAM.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-I, MACHILIPATNAM.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX VIJAYAWADA, A.P.
3. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI.
...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 toissue appropriate writ order or orders or direction in thenature of Writ of mandamus, or any other appropirate writ as the Hon'ble Court deems fit, declaring the 3rd and 4th provisions of section 80HHC(iii) in so far as it provides for conditions (a) and (b) therein as ultravires and unconstitutional, violative of the provisions of articles 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and strike down the said 3rd and 4th proviso of section 80HHC(iii) as introduced by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005 and pass other order or orders. IA NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP 22845 OF 2006
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 direct the 1st respondent from not to disturb the orders of assessment passed on the petitioner in respect of past assessment year upto date of amendment of Sec. 80 HHC bythe Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005. IA NO: 2 OF 2006(WPMP 22846 OF 2006 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 stay the recovery of tax pursuant to the amendment of 3rd and 4th provisos of section 80HHC (iii) pending disposal of the W.P. Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K K VISWANATHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. .
2. Y N VIVEKANANDA The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
WRIT PETITION No.18188 of 2006
ORDER:(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Hari Haranadha Sarma)
This writ petition is filed seeking a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the 3rd and 4th provisos of Section 80HHC(iii) in so far as it provides for conditions (a) and (b) therein as ultravires and unconstitutional violative of the provisions of Articles 14,19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and strike down the said 3rd and 4th provisos of Section 80HHC(iii) as introduced by the Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2005.
2) This petition is filed aggrieved by the reopening of the assessments already completed pursuant to amendment taken place with the provisos of Section 80HHC(iii) of the Income Tax 1961.
3) A Coordinate Division Bench of this Court by considering the judgement of the High Court of Gujarat in Avani Exports and others vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot & others1 and also Commissioner of Income Tax-5 and another vs. Avani Exports and another2 and also by considering the representation of the counsel for the respondent No.1 apart from the settled legal position that amendment should not entitle the Assessing Officer to reopen the completed assessments, allowed the writ petitions vide W.P.Nos.21155 of 2006 and batch.
12015 SCC Online SC 676 22012 SCC Online Guj 3837
4) Learned counsel for the respondents would fairly submit that the context in the present case is squarely covered by the judgement.
5) Therefore, the present Writ Petition is also allowed by following the same holding that the amended provision does not entitle the assessing authority to reopen the assessments already completed.
6) There shall be no order as to costs.
7) Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
__________________________________ JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
Date: 06.01.2026 SCS/SA
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
WRIT PETITION No.18188 of 2006 Date: 06.01.2026
SCS/SA