La No: 1 Of 2024 v. Raghu Ram

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTENIBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION NOS- 25648 AND 25657 OF 2024 WRIT PETITION NO: 25648 OF 2024 Between: Sri Balasaidi Reddy Yeredla, S/o Sri Koti Reddy Yeredla, Aged about 48years, Occ. Business, 30-191, Beside Vijaya Garden, Eduluguda, Miryalguda,Nalgonda - 508207 ..,PETITIONER AND 1.The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Near Rail Under Bridge, Nalgonda -508001.508001. 2. Assessment Unrt, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome TaxDepartment, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp,Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi -.1 10 003.Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp,Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi -.1 10 003. .RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Hagh Court may bepleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OFMANDAMUS holding that the order passed by ['1'r ]Respondent u/s.148A(d) of theAct, dt.30.03.2023 with DIN and Notice No. ITBAJAST/F/148N2022-2311051627896(1) and the notice dated 01.04.2023 issued under section 148 ofthe Act with DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148 -112023-2411051841596(1) forthe assessmenl yeat 2016-17, as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in grossviolation of principles of natural justice without application of mind, andconsequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that an the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be [pleased ]tosuspend the operation of the notice issued by the 1"r Respondent u/s.148 of theAct, dt.0'1.04.2023 for the assessmenl year 2016-17 with DIN and NoticeNo.ITBA/AST/S t148 -112023-24/1051841596(1) and all consequential proceedingsthereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. RAGHU RAM Counsel forthe Respondents: MS. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY(Jr. SC FOR INCOME TAX) WRIT PETITION NO: 25657 OF 2024 Between: Smt. Nama Krishnaveni, D/o. Sri Nama Showri, Aged about 40 [years,]Occupation- Private Service, 4-1 18, Bothalapalem, Damaracherla Mandalam,Damaracherla, Nalgonda - 508355 ...PETITIONER AND 1The lncome Tax Officer. Ward - 1, Near Rail Under Bridge, Nalgonda [-]508001.508001. 2Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome TaxDepartment, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp,Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 110 003.Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp,Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 110 003. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia [praying ]that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OFMANDAMUS holding that the order passed by 1"r Respondent u/s.'148A(d) of theAct, d1.2O 03 2024 with DIN and Notice No-ITBA/AST/F1148N2023-2411063015266(1) and the notice dated 2010312024 issued under section 148 ofthe Act with DIN and Notice No-|TBA./AST/S/148.1/2023-2411063029164(1) for theassessment year 2020-21 , as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violationof principles of natural justice without application of mind, and consequently setaside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 ][to]suspend the operation of the notice issued by the 1't [Respondent ][u/s.148 ][of ][the]Act, d1.20.03.2024 for lhe assessment [yeat ][2O2O-21 ][with ] [and ][Notice ][No-]ITBA,/AST/S/148 .112023- 2411063029164(1) and [all ][consequential ][proceedings]thereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. RAGHU Counsel forthe Respondents: MS.BOKARO SAPNA (Jr. SC FOR INCOME TAX) lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 ][to]suspend the operation of the notice issued by the 1't [Respondent ][u/s.148 ][of ][the]Act, d1.20.03.2024 for lhe assessment [yeat ][2O2O-21 ][with ] [and ][Notice ][No-]ITBA,/AST/S/148 .112023- 2411063029164(1) and [all ][consequential ][proceedings]thereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. RAGHU Counsel forthe Respondents: MS.BOKARO SAPNA (Jr. SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: t'-1THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NOs.25648 [25657 ][0F ][2024] COMMON ORDER[(per ]Hon'ble [SP,J)] Sri A.V. Raghu Ram, learned counsel, [appears ][for ][the]petitioner(s) and Ms.B.Sapna Reddy, learned Junior [Standing]Counsel for Income Tax Department, appears for [the]respondent(s). 2Regard being had to the similarity of the [question]invoir.ed,ol-l the joint request of the parties, the matters [are]analogously l-re:rrd and decided b-v this common order. 3. It is common ground taken by the learned counsel [for]the petitioner(s) that in furtherance of Finance Act, [2021,][ re]assessment process stood modified but the respondents [have ][not]taken care ol it and therefore notices issued under Section [148]of the Income Tax Act, 196 1 cannot sustain [judicial ]scrutiny.Since notices are bad in law, the consequential orders are [also]bad in lau, 4During the course of hearing, learned counsel for theparties agreed that curtains on this issue are finally drawn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.259O3 of 2022parties agreed that curtains on this issue are finally drawn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.259O3 of 2022-"'.1 other connected matters, decided by common order dated 14.O9.2023. The parties agreed that this matter ma.y be disposedof in terms of the Common Order dated 14.09.2023. 5This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 rnW.P.No.25903 of 2022, held as under: "35. ln view of the aforesaid discussions, it is by now very clear thatthe procedure to be followed by the respondent-Department upontreating the notices issued for reassessment being under Section148A, the subsequent proceedings was mandatorily required to beundertaken under the substituted provisions as laid down under theFinance Act, 2021. ln the absence of which, we are constrained to holdthat the procedure adopted by the respondent-Department is incontravention to the statute i.e. the Finance Acl, 2021, at the firstinstance. Secondly, it is also in direct contravention to the directivesissued by the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Ashish Agarwal,s u pra. 36. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned notices issued and theproceedings drawn by the respondent-Department is neither tenable,nor sustainable. The notices so issued and the procedure adoptedbeing per se illegal, deserves to be and are accordingly setaside/quashed. As a consequence, all the impugned orders gettingquashed, the consequential orders passed by the respondentDepartment puisuant to the notices issued under Section 147 and 148would also get quashed and it is ordered accordingly. The reason lveare quashing the consequential order is on the principles that whenthe initiation of the proceedings itself was procedurally wrong, thesubsequent orders also gets nullified automatically. 37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained andall these writ petitions stands allowed on this very jurisdictional issue.Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on thepoint of jurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decidethe other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to beraised and contended in an appropriate proceedings. 37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained andall these writ petitions stands allowed on this very jurisdictional issue.Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on thepoint of jurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decidethe other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to beraised and contended in an appropriate proceedings. 38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of AshishAgarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising ihe powers underArticle 142 of the Constitution of lndia, permitted the Revenue toproceed under the substituted provisions, and this Court allowing thepetitions only on the procedural flaw, the right conferred on the Revenue would remain reserved to [proceed ]further if they so wantfrom the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of AshishAgarwal, supra. 39- No order as to costs." 6In vieu' of the consensus arrived, the impugned ShowCause notices ald consequential orders passed in this batch ofwrit petitions are set aside. Liberty is reserved to both the partiesto take respective stand and to proceed in accordance with lawas per paragraph No.38 of the order dated 14.O9.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022.Cause notices ald consequential orders passed in this batch ofwrit petitions are set aside. Liberty is reserved to both the partiesto take respective stand and to proceed in accordance with lawas per paragraph No.38 of the order dated 14.O9.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022. 7The Writ Petitions are allowed. No costs. Interlocutorvapplications, if any pending, shall a,lso stand closed SD/. N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAOASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY// -\SEC1ION OFFICER To,1The lncome Tax Officer, Ward [- ][1, ][Near ][Rail ][Under ][Brldge, Nalgonda ][-]5080012Assessment Unit. National [Faceless ][Assessment Centre, lncome Tax]Department. Mrnistry of Finance, [Room No. 401, ][2nd ][Floor, E-Ramp,]Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. Delht [-1 ]['10 ]003.3One CC to Sri A. V. [Raghu ]Ram, [Advocate ]IOPUC]4One CC to Ms. Bokaro Sapna [Reddy (Jr. SC ][for lncome ][Tax) ] 5Two CD CopiesTJAYLS\ HIGH COURT DATED:1910912024 1 H€ Ip(? [10 ][oEC ][202{]T'i\--t COMMON ORDER WRIT PETITION NOS. 25648 AND [25657 ] [2024] ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS ?+!1r1* [\zl]1c4;p'