Tax Writ Petitions in Bangladesh 2026: Assessments, Reopening, Bank Freezes and the Tribunal

Tax writ petition Bangladesh: when Article 102 meets the Income Tax Act 2023

A tax writ petition Bangladesh taxpayers file in the High Court Division is often the only way to stop an unlawful income tax demand, reopening notice or bank freeze before it does lasting damage. The Income Tax Act 2023 gives assessees a full ladder of statutory remedies: appeal, Tribunal, reference and revision. Those remedies work well for disputes about figures. They work badly when an officer has no jurisdiction, ignores a time limit, decides without a hearing, or freezes every account a family owns on a hunch. That is where Article 102 of the Constitution comes in.

This guide explains when the High Court Division will hear a writ against an income tax authority and when it will send the taxpayer back to the statutory forum. It covers assessments and notices, revision under sections 212 and 213, bank attachment and interim freezes under sections 221 and 223, deposit requirements, and the 2025 and 2026 judgments that now set the rules for freezes by the tax intelligence units.

Summary: The Income Tax Act 2023 routes most disputes through appeal to the appellate income tax authority, the Taxes Appellate Tribunal and a reference to the High Court Division on questions of law, each with deadlines and deposit conditions. A writ under Article 102 lies where that route is not equally efficacious: where the authority acts without jurisdiction, outside a time limit, in bad faith, or in breach of natural justice. In 2026 the High Court Division set aside several bank and FDR freezes made under section 223 because the authorities had no specific information of concealment when they acted.

Key point: Section 223 of the Income Tax Act 2023 allows an interim freeze only where the Director General of the Central Intelligence Cell or a Commissioner has specific information that a person has concealed income or investment. In April and July 2026 the High Court Division set aside freezes issued first and justified later, calling the practice "putting the cart before the horse".

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

Why a tax writ petition Bangladesh courts will hear is the exception, not the rule

Article 102(2) of the Constitution lets the High Court Division quash an act done without lawful authority, or direct an authority to do what the law requires, only if satisfied that no other equally efficacious remedy is provided by law.[1] The Income Tax Act 2023 provides an elaborate remedy, and section 196 adds that no person or authority other than the income tax authorities, the Taxes Appellate Tribunal and the Supreme Court may question an assessment made under the Act.[2] The writ jurisdiction therefore sits on top of the statutory system rather than beside it.

That does not make the writ rare in practice. It makes it targeted. The High Court Division restated the test in July 2026: where the action of a statutory authority is ex facie illegal, mala fide, arbitrary or without jurisdiction, the existence of a statutory remedy does not bar Article 102.[3] The Court relied on the Appellate Division's statement in British American Tobacco Bangladesh Co Ltd v National Board of Revenue, 25 BLC (AD) 49, that a statutory appeal is no bar where the entire action appears illegal, mala fide and arbitrary on the face of the record.[3]

The statutory ladder you are bypassing

Knowing what the Act offers is essential, because the Court will ask why it was not used. Under section 286 an assessee may appeal to the appellate income tax authority against an assessment, a computation of tax, penalty, interest or refund, and appeals by companies go only to the Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals). Under section 287 the appeal must generally be filed within 45 days of service of the demand notice.[2]

A further appeal lies to the Taxes Appellate Tribunal within 60 days under section 291, and the Tribunal's order is final on facts. Either side may then refer a question of law to the High Court Division within 90 days under section 293.[2] An assessee may instead ask the Commissioner to revise a subordinate's order under section 285, within 60 days, but the Commissioner cannot pass an order prejudicial to the assessee and cannot act while an appeal is still available and unexpired.[2]

Deposit requirements and how they shape the choice of forum

Every rung of the statutory ladder has a price, although the Finance Act 2026 has made it much cheaper. Section 286(5) bars an appeal against an assessment unless the admitted tax liability has been paid where a return was filed, or at least 10% of the tax determined has been paid where no return was filed.[2] Section 291(2) bars an appeal to the Tribunal unless the assessee has paid 10% of the difference between the tax determined by the appellate order and the admitted tax liability, although the Commissioner may reduce that requirement on a reasonable application.[2]

A reference to the High Court Division under section 293 carries a fee of Tk 2,000 and, in the Act as published in 2025, a deposit of 15% or 25% of the disputed difference depending on whether the demand exceeds Tk 10 lakh.[2]

The 2026 cuts to pre-deposits

From the 2026-27 financial year the Finance Act 2026 introduces a 1% pre-deposit for appeals to the Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals), cuts the Tribunal deposit from 10% to 3%, and cuts the High Court Division deposit from 15% or 25% to 10%. It also discontinues waivers of pre-deposit.[6] Check which regime applies to the order under challenge before filing.

A writ petition carries no statutory deposit. That is precisely why the courts scrutinise writs that look like attempts to avoid deposits on what are really ordinary appeals.

When a deposit is missed

Missing a deposit is a common and costly error, but it is not always fatal. In Md Iftekharul Alam v National Board of Revenue, decided on 13 December 2023, the Tribunal had rejected an appeal because the 10% deposit required by the repealed Ordinance had not been paid. The High Court Division found no illegality in the Tribunal's order. Because the assessee had since deposited the 10%, however, it directed the Tribunal to recall its order and hear the appeal on the merits within three months.[5] The safer course is to pay the required deposit before filing, particularly now that waivers have been discontinued.[6]

Writs against assessments, reopening and revision

A tax writ petition Bangladesh practitioners bring against an assessment rarely succeeds on the merits of the figures. It succeeds when the authority had no power to act at all, or exercised a power outside its statutory conditions.

Escaped payment notices under section 212

Section 212 lets the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, with reason to believe that a sum has escaped payment, issue a notice requiring a return and payment for the year concerned. Where the original return was filed under the self-assessment provision or the assessment has been completed, written approval of the Additional Commissioner is required first, and outside the cases where no return was filed the notice can reach back only to the sixth preceding assessment year.[2] A notice issued without the required approval, beyond the permitted period, or without any stated reason to believe is the classic subject of a writ.

Revision of "erroneous" orders under section 213

Section 213 lets the Inspecting Additional Commissioner revise an order of the Deputy Commissioner that is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, but section 213(3) provides that no order may be made after four years from the date of the order sought to be revised.[2]

In OnMobile Global Ltd v National Board of Revenue, decided on 28 July 2026, the inspecting officer issued a section 213 notice in May 2024 to rehear an assessment for 2013-14 that had been completed in September 2015. The High Court Division found that the officer had acted arbitrarily and in bad faith, rejected the argument that the company should have used sections 285, 286, 291 and 293, and declared the notice and the consequent orders without lawful authority.[3]

Denial of a fair hearing

Natural justice is a separate and powerful ground. In Engineer Md Mohosin v Commissioner of Taxes, decided on 5 July 2026, the Commissioner had rejected a revision application after a hearing fixed only days after the notice was posted, with two public holidays in between and no proof of delivery on the record. The High Court Division held that the rule of audi alteram partem had been flagrantly violated, set the revisional order aside, remitted the matter for rehearing within 45 days, and stayed the freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts until the revision was decided.[4]

Where the courts refuse to intervene

A tax writ petition Bangladesh courts regard as a disguised appeal will fail. Writs fail where the complaint is really about tax policy or the correct application of a valid provision. In BSRM Steels Ltd v Commissioner of Taxes, decided on 29 July 2026, the High Court Division discharged Rules challenging minimum tax assessments, found no legal or procedural error, and relied on the Appellate Division's statement in S Alam Beg Manufacturing Mills Ltd v Government of Bangladesh, 28 BLC (AD) (2023) 220, that courts must show restraint on tax policy and that a fair taxation law enacted by Parliament is not open to judicial review on that ground.[7]

The Appellate Division has also held that tax exemptions granted by notification under the repealed Ordinance were conditional, discretionary and open to lawful withdrawal, and that promissory estoppel does not bind fiscal discretion without a statutory guarantee.[11] Our guide to challenging an SRO in the High Court explains where the line falls for notifications.

Bank attachment and freezes: sections 221 and 223

Bank freezes are where a tax writ petition Bangladesh businesses file is most urgent, because a frozen operating account stops salaries, letters of credit and supplier payments within days. The Income Tax Act 2023 contains two very different powers, and the grounds of challenge depend on which one was used.

Section 221: recovery of arrears through banks

Section 221(3) lets the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, by written notice, direct any person holding money for the assessee, including a bank, to pay it into the treasury.[2] It is a recovery power. It presupposes tax that is due and in default. Section 214(6) provides that where an assessee has appealed against the assessment or the amount of tax, the Deputy Commissioner must treat the assessee as not in default while the appeal is pending.[2]

In University of Asia Pacific v National Board of Revenue, decided on 4 June 2024, the tax office attached the university's bank accounts under section 221 for over Tk 28.64 crore and then directed the bank to pay the demand by pay order. Appeals were pending for three of the assessment years, and the memos did not identify the years. The High Court Division set the memos aside, allowed recovery only for years with no pending appeal, and barred the office from proceeding on the years under appeal.[10]

Section 223: interim freezes on suspicion of concealment

Section 223 is a different animal. It allows the Director General of the Central Intelligence Cell or a Commissioner, on specific information that a person has concealed income or investment, to order anyone holding that person's money or assets not to remove, transfer or dispose of them without permission. The order lapses after one year and may be extended, with Board approval, by no more than one year in total, excluding any period stayed by a court.[2]

Freezes by the tax intelligence units became frequent after 2024. In April 2025, for example, the Central Intelligence Cell told banks and non-bank financial institutions to freeze the accounts of a leading advertising agency on suspicion of tax evasion.[12] Two 2026 judgments now set firm limits on how this power can be used, and they are the starting point for any tax writ petition Bangladesh account holders bring against a freeze.

The 2026 decisions on section 223

In Md Sirajul Islam v National Board of Revenue, decided on 23 April 2026, notices issued in December 2025 froze the bank accounts, FDRs and credit facilities of the petitioners, their family members and their businesses. The petitioners had paid substantial taxes for 2024-25 and their returns had been accepted without audit. The High Court Division held that section 223 requires definite information about concealment before the freeze is ordered, found that the information had been collected from the banks only afterwards, and set the notices aside with a direction to reopen all accounts within seven days.[8]

In Sadrul Hasan v Commissioner of Taxes, decided on 8 July 2026, the Court followed that ruling. It upheld a demand for bank information under section 200, holding that the information-gathering power is not limited by the assessment time limits. It nevertheless set aside the section 223 freezes on the petitioners' FDRs, holding that the section requires individualised satisfaction about each person whose assets are frozen, and that a blanket freeze on unnamed "family members", named only later, could not meet that requirement.[9] The broader landscape of freezes is covered in our guide to bank account freeze writs.

Procedure for a tax writ

A tax writ petition Bangladesh lawyers prepare follows the ordinary Article 102 procedure described in our guide to writ petitions in Bangladesh. What distinguishes it is speed, the record and the interim order. The steps below reflect how these cases are best run.

Swipe or scroll →

Interim relief and the Appellate Division

The interim stay is often the real battleground. The Government regularly seeks leave against stays of tax demands and freezes. In the Mohosin case the Government took the stay to the Appellate Division, which modified it on 10 May 2026 and directed the High Court Division to hear and dispose of the Rule within a fixed period.[4] Where an interim order is likely to harm the public interest, Article 102(4) also requires reasonable notice to the Attorney General before it is made.[1] A petition that offers to pay undisputed tax, or to keep a defined balance in the account, stands a better chance of a workable stay.

When the case becomes academic

Tax proceedings move on while a writ is pending. If an investigation notice under challenge leads to a completed reassessment and a fresh demand, the Rule against the original notice may be discharged as having no live cause of action. Petitioners must keep the statutory remedies alive against any later order, or risk winning the writ and losing the tax.

Choosing between writ and statutory remedy

The table below compares the main routes and shows where a tax writ petition Bangladesh taxpayers file fits. On a phone, scroll it sideways.

Common mistakes in a tax writ petition Bangladesh case

• Filing a writ on the merits: a dispute about disallowed expenses or income estimates belongs in appeal, and the Court will say so.[7]
• Letting the 45-day appeal window pass: if the writ is held not maintainable, the statutory remedy may be lost.
• Ignoring section 214(6): a pending appeal means the assessee is not in default, which is often the complete answer to a section 221 attachment.[2]
• Treating every freeze alike: a section 221 recovery notice and a section 223 interim freeze have different conditions and must be attacked on different grounds.
• Thin evidence: annex returns, acceptance receipts, tax certificates, the freeze letters and bank correspondence so that the timeline speaks for itself, as it did in the 2026 freeze cases.[8] [9]

Tax writ petition Bangladesh: the outlook for 2026 and 2027

The 2026 judgments give taxpayers a clear framework against blanket freezes, and the tax intelligence units can be expected to document their "specific information" more carefully before acting. The Court's acceptance that section 200 information demands are not limited by the assessment time limits points the same way: investigations can range widely, but freezes must be justified person by person.[9] At the same time, the BSRM and City Edible Oil decisions confirm that the writ is not a second appeal on tax policy.[7] [11]

For background on the statute, see our analysis of the Income Tax Act 2023 and our note on tax audits in Bangladesh. TRW's tax disputes team and constitutional and writ litigation practice work together on tax writ petition Bangladesh matters, from emergency stays of bank freezes to Tribunal appeals and references.

Frequently asked questions

Can I file a writ against an income tax assessment in Bangladesh?

Only in limited cases. The High Court Division will hear a writ where the authority acted without jurisdiction, in bad faith, arbitrarily or outside a time limit, but disputes on the merits belong in the statutory appeal.[1] [3]

What is the time limit for an income tax appeal?

Generally 45 days from service of the demand notice for a first appeal, 60 days for an appeal to the Taxes Appellate Tribunal, and 90 days for a reference to the High Court Division.[2]

How much must I deposit to appeal to the Taxes Appellate Tribunal?

From the 2026-27 financial year, 3% of the disputed amount, down from 10%, under the Finance Act 2026, which also discontinued waivers of pre-deposit.[6]

Is there a deposit for a tax writ petition?

The Constitution imposes no statutory deposit for a writ, but courts often expect undisputed tax to be paid and may attach conditions to an interim stay.[1]

Can the tax office freeze my bank account without notice?

Section 223 allows an interim freeze only on specific information of concealment. In 2026 the High Court Division set aside freezes ordered before that information existed and freezes aimed generally at family members.[8] [9]

How long can a section 223 freeze last?

It lapses after one year, and any extension approved by the Board cannot exceed one year in total. Time during which a court has stayed the order is excluded.[2]

Can tax be recovered from my bank account while my appeal is pending?

Section 214(6) treats an assessee with a pending appeal as not in default, and the High Court Division has set aside attachments covering years under appeal.[2] [10]

Is there a time limit for revising an assessment under section 213?

Yes. No revisional order may be made after four years from the date of the order sought to be revised.[2]

What if the tax authority decides without giving me a proper hearing?

A decision taken without adequate notice and opportunity to be heard can be quashed on writ, as the High Court Division did with a Commissioner's revisional order in July 2026.[4]

Can the Government appeal if I win a tax writ?

Yes. The Government can seek leave to appeal to the Appellate Division, including against interim stays, and frequently does so in revenue cases.[1] [4]