La No: 1 Of 2023 v. Raghu Ram

[ [337e ]1 HIGH COURT FOR THE (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE [P.SAM KOSHY]ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [N.TUKARAMJI] WRIT PETITION NO: 32393 Between: Mrs. Fouzia Khan, Wo. [Mr.M.H.A.Khan, ][aged about ][58- ][years, ][1-10-1'z16F6']Fiat ruo.6, B Block, kundan [Towers, Mayuri ][Marg, ][Begumpet, Hyderabad'] ...PETITIONER AND '1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward -10(1), l.T. Towers, A.C- Guards' Masabtank,Hyderabad -500004.Hyderabad -500004. 2. Assessment Unit, National [Faceless ][Assessment Centre, ][lncorne ][Tax]Department, Ministry of Finance' [Room ][No' ][4O1 ],2nd [Floor, ][E-Ramp,]Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi ][- ]['t ][10 ][003]Department, Ministry of Finance' [Room ][No' ][4O1 ],2nd [Floor, ][E-Ramp,]Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi ][- ]['t ][10 ][003] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article [226 ][of ][the ][conslitution ][of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances stated in the [affidavit ][filed ][therewith, ][the ][High ][court ][may ][be]pleased to pass an order or direction, especially [one ][in the ][nature ][of ][wRlT oF]MANDAMUS holding that the [order ][passed by ][Respondent u/s.148A(d) of the Act,]dt.3oto3l2o23 with & [Notice ][No.ITBA/AST/F ][11 ][48N2O22-23/1 ][051 ][683062(1 ][)]and the notice dated 3olo3l2o23 [issued under ][section l4B of the ][Act ][with ] [&]Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/1 [48_1 ][12022-231 1051 ][683258(1 ]) [for the ][assessment year]2016-'17, as being illegal, [arbitrary ][and ][passed ][in gross ][violation ][of ][principles ][of]natural [justice ]without application [of ][mind and consequently ][set ][aside the ][same.] lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section ['151 ]of CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased tosuspend the operation of the notice issued by the Respondent u/s.148 of the Act,dt.3OlO3l2O23 for the assessrnent yeat 2O1G17 with DIN & NoticeNo.ITBA/AST/S,1148_112022-2311051683258(1) and all consequential proceedingsthereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SR! A. V. RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRlJ. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE [P.SAM ] AND THE HOIT'BLE [N.TUKARAMJI] sI.P. No.32393 of2023 ORDER:@er [aon'bLe ][Sri ][Justkp ][P'SA" ][rOSII'?] When the [matter ][is ][taken ][up ][for ][hearing ][today' ][it ][has ][been] informed t:y [tne ][parties ][that ][an ][identical ][writ ][petition ][i'e'']W.P.No.30l53of3o23hasalreadybeenallowedanddisposedofbythis Court [uide ][order ][dated ][30' 1O'2023'] 2. [n view of the [fact ][t]rat the ][identical matter has ][already ][been]allowed by [this ][Court, ][we are ][inclined ][to allow the ][instant ][writ ][petition]also, in terms [of ][the ][order ][passed ][in ][W'P'No'30153 of 2023 ][decided on]30.1O.2023 [on ][similar ][terms.] 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous [applications pending ][if ][any ][in ][this]writ petition, [shatl ][stand closed' ][No ][order ][as ][to costs'] //rRUE coPY/'to'-*'?ltHmr#m3 [I] SECT]ON To,1The lncome [Tax ][fficer' ][Ward ][-10(1)' ][l'T' ][Towers' ][A'C' Guards' ][Masabtank']Hvderabad [-500004.]2XIIJ.li ;;;il;i """, [uti-l'iational ]rtrii"i'.irv [or ][Finance' ][Faceless Assessrnent^centre' lncome ][Room ][No' ][4o ][1' ][2nd ][Floor' ][E+amp'][Tax]Jai"nrrr"r [Nehru Siadium, ][Delhi ][-'t10 ][003]3b;;tctl si [n' ][v. ][Rashu Ram' Advocate toPy^c-I...]4. il; aa [io ][sri.t. ][V. ][Praiad, ] [for ][lncome Tax ][ ] 5. Two [CD CoPies] (Along with a [coPY ][of ][the order' dated ][30.10-2023 ][in ][W'P ][No ][30153 ol 2023)] GJBS[w'] HIGH COURT DATED:2411112023 ORDER WP.No.32393 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS + "?&aYP5-1ul,, //rRUE coPY/'to'-*'?ltHmr#m3 [I] SECT]ON To,1The lncome [Tax ][fficer' ][Ward ][-10(1)' ][l'T' ][Towers' ][A'C' Guards' ][Masabtank']Hvderabad [-500004.]2XIIJ.li ;;;il;i """, [uti-l'iational ]rtrii"i'.irv [or ][Finance' ][Faceless Assessrnent^centre' lncome ][Room ][No' ][4o ][1' ][2nd ][Floor' ][E+amp'][Tax]Jai"nrrr"r [Nehru Siadium, ][Delhi ][-'t10 ][003]3b;;tctl si [n' ][v. ][Rashu Ram' Advocate toPy^c-I...]4. il; aa [io ][sri.t. ][V. ][Praiad, ] [for ][lncome Tax ][ ] 5. Two [CD CoPies] (Along with a [coPY ][of ][the order' dated ][30.10-2023 ][in ][W'P ][No ][30153 ol 2023)] GJBS[w'] HIGH COURT DATED:2411112023 ORDER WP.No.32393 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS + "?&aYP5-1ul,, 1HE 14:('JqO2 0 0E[ 2023zo**o['$parr:F.'j:,i: I!i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No.30153 of 2O23 ORI)ER:per aon'bte Sri Justice P.SAM Ko.SHY) He.ard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for thepetitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counselfor Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Pemsed the entirerecord. 2. The instant petition has been liled challenging *re AssessmentOrder passed by respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act") dated 25.04.2022for the Assessment Year 20 18- 19. 3. One of the contentions tl'rat the petitioner has raised in thepresent writ petition is that under the amended provisions of the Actwhich came into effect from O1.O4.2O21, the respondents whileproceeding under Section 148 of the Act were required to issue noticeunder Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to [the]assessee. As per the amended [provision ]of law, [the ][proceedings to ][be]drawn are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, it [has ][been ][contended]by the petitioner that in the instant case, [reopening has ][been ][initiated]by the Juridictional Assessing Offrcer. In respect [of ][the said objection]that the petitioner had raised, he relied upon [the ][recent ][batch ][of ][writ] petitions decided by this very Bench on 14.09 .2023 videW.P.No.259O3 ot 2022 and batch to t].e limited extent. 4. karned counsel for the Department counsel for the Department for the Department Department would not dispute ofdispute ofofhaving decided the said objection in the aforesaid batch matters.However, learned counsel submits that apart from the aforesaidobjection, there have been other various objections also which thepetitioner has raised in the writ petition. karned counsel for the Department counsel for the Department for the Department Department would not dispute ofdispute ofof 5. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for theDepartment is concerned, this Bench, while disposing ofW.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch had taken note of the same inparagraph Nos.37 & 38 which is reproduced herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner issustained and all these writ petitions stands allowed on this veryjurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders aregetting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we are not inclin€d toproceed further and decide the other issues raised by thepetitioner which stands reserved to be raised arrd contended in anappropriate proceedings- " 38. Since the Hon''ble Supreme Court had, in tlle cas€ of AshishAgarwal, supra, as a one time measure exercising the powersunder Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted theRevenue to proceed under the substituted provisions, and thisCourt allowing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the rightconferred on the Revenue would remain reserved to proceedfurther if they so r','ant from the stage of the order of the SupremeCourt in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ 38. Since the Hon''ble Supreme Court had, in tlle cas€ of AshishAgarwal, supra, as a one time measure exercising the powersunder Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted theRevenue to proceed under the substituted provisions, and thisCourt allowing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the rightconferred on the Revenue would remain reserved to proceedfurther if they so r','ant from the stage of the order of the SupremeCourt in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petitionstands allowed on the objecfion of the petitioner that the proceedingshave not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision butunder the unamended provision which is otherwise not sustainable.stands allowed on the objecfion of the petitioner that the proceedingshave not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision butunder the unamended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. iigI!II!,: As has been held [by ][this ][Bench ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch matters, ][the]right of the respondents [would ][stand ][reserved ][as ][is ][envisaged ][in]paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said batch. [No ][order ][as ][to ][costs.]7 . Consequently, miscellaneous [petitions ][pending, ][if ][any, ][shall]stand closed. P.SATU KOSITY, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, [J] Dated: 3O. 1O.2023a'qs