Prasuna Venepally, Aged 68 Years, Wio v. Venkateshwar Rao

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 2255 OF 2024 Between: Prasuna Venepally, aged 68 years, Wio V. Venkateshwar Rao, 203, lndiraHeights, 6-3-597, Venkataramana Colony, Hyderabad - 5OOOO1..'=,TIONER AND 1Stand, lncome Tax Officer, Veerabhadra Ward Nagar, Sangareddy, ['l ], Sangareddy, Andhra Veerabhadra Pradesh, Nagar, 502001New Bus zThe Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax AP & TS, 1Oth Floor, C-Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 3. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may becircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned order d1.29.03.2023 forA.Y.2016-17 passed u/s ['148A(d) ]of the Act vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/Fl148Al2O22-the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned order d1.29.03.2023 forA.Y.2016-17 passed u/s ['148A(d) ]of the Act vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/Fl148Al2O22-2311051623457(1) (Exhibit P-1) and the consequential notice u/s 148dt.31 03.2023 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlst 1 48_1 12022-231 1051 827 31 6(1 ), issuedby the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO (3'd respondent), as void, illegal, andcontrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles ofNatural Justice.by the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO (3'd respondent), as void, illegal, andcontrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles ofNatural Justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section ['1 ]51 CPC [praying ][that ][in ][the ][circumstances ][stated]in the affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ][the ][High Court may ][be ][pleased ][to]stay all further [proceedings pursuant ][to the ][notice ][u/s ][148 ][dt. ][31.03.2023 vide]DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/'148-112022-23110518273'16('1)issued [by the ][1st]Respondent (JAO) for A.Y. [2015-l6instead ][of 3rd ][respondent (FAO).] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. SUNDARI (Sr SC for INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT) The Court made the following: ORDER ffi,@r,ffi,,, THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [P.SAM ] ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIWRIT PETITION No.2255 OF 2024 ORDER ftter Hon'ble [Si ][Justice P.SAM ][KOSHY)] The instant Writ Petition has been filed by [the]petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution [of ][India]seeking for the [following ][relief:] "to issue a [Wit ][of ][Mondamus or ang other appropriate ][Wit]Order or Direction declaring the [impugned ][order ][dated]29.03.2023 for assessmen[ [gear ][2016-17 ][passed ][u/s ][148(d)]of the Act uide DIN [No.ITBA/ ] [148A/ ][2022-]23/105162357(1) and tlrc consequential [notice ]u/s [148]dated 31.O3.2O23 uide DIN NO.ITBA/ [148-1/2022-]23/ 1051827316(1), issued bg [the JAO ][(1't ][respondent)]instead of FAO [(3'd ]respondent), [as ][uoid, ][ilLegal, ][and contrary]to the prouisions of Income Tox [Act ][ond ][contrary ][to ][the]pinciples of natural [justice ]ond [pass ]other [orders ][as ][this]Hon'ble Court mag [deem ]fit and [proper".] "to issue a [Wit ][of ][Mondamus or ang other appropriate ][Wit]Order or Direction declaring the [impugned ][order ][dated]29.03.2023 for assessmen[ [gear ][2016-17 ][passed ][u/s ][148(d)]of the Act uide DIN [No.ITBA/ ] [148A/ ][2022-]23/105162357(1) and tlrc consequential [notice ]u/s [148]dated 31.O3.2O23 uide DIN NO.ITBA/ [148-1/2022-]23/ 1051827316(1), issued bg [the JAO ][(1't ][respondent)]instead of FAO [(3'd ]respondent), [as ][uoid, ][ilLegal, ][and contrary]to the prouisions of Income Tox [Act ][ond ][contrary ][to ][the]pinciples of natural [justice ]ond [pass ]other [orders ][as ][this]Hon'ble Court mag [deem ]fit and [proper".] 2. One of the contentions that the [petitioner ][has ][raised]in the present Writ Petition [is ][that ][under ][the ][amended]of the Act which [caine ][into ][effect ][from]provisions Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, [while ][proceeding ][under]Section 148 [of ]the [Act, ][were ][required to ][issue notice ][under]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 ][mm.qgr.] PSr(,J& MrR'J Whereas, [[learned ][counsel ][for the ]][[counsel ][for the ]][[for the ]][[petitioner]] 3. Whereas, [[learned ][counsel ][for the ]][[counsel ][for the ]][[for the ]][[petitioner]]contendedthat,intheinstantcase'reopeninghasbeeninitiatedbytheJurisdictionalAssessingofficer.Insupportofhiscontention,hereliedupontherecentjudgmentrendered [by ][this ][very ][Bench ][in ][WP'No'25903 ][of ][2022 ][&']batch,datedl4.og.2o23whereinthisCourtdisposedofthebatch of writ [petitions to ][the ][limited ][extent'] On the other the other other [[hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ][for ][the]][[Counsel ][for ][the]][[for ][the]][[the]] 4. On the other the other other [[hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ][for ][the]][[Counsel ][for ][the]][[for ][the]][[the]]respondent-Department [does ][not ][dispute ][that ][the ][said]objection [was ][decided ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions. [However, ][he further ][contended ][that ][apart ][from]the a-foresaid [objection, ][there ][have been ][other ][various]objections [also ][which the petitioner has ][raised ][in ][the ][writ]petition. So far as far as as [[this ][contention ][of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[contention ][of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[leamed ][counsel ][for]][[counsel ][for]][[for]] 5. So far as far as as [[this ][contention ][of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[contention ][of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[of the ][leamed ][counsel ][for]][[leamed ][counsel ][for]][[counsel ][for]][[for]]the respondent-Department [is concerned' ][this ][Bench' while]disposing [of ][said ][batch ][of ][writ ][petitions' ][had taken note of]the same at [paragraph ][Nos'37 ][& ][38 ][which ][are ][reproduced]herein under: .37. The preliminory objection raised bA the petitioneris sustained and all these urit petitions stands allowedon this uery [jurisdictional ]issue. Since the impugnednotices and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjuri.sdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed furttrcr anddecide the other issues raised bg the petitioner tuhichstands reserued to be rai-sed and contended in an"appropriate p ro ce eding s. "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in ttrc caseof Ashish Aganua| supro., as a one-time measureexercising the powers under Article 1a2 of theConstitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to [proceed]under the substituted prouisions, and this Courtallou-ting the petitions onlg on tle [procedural ]flaut, tLrcight confened on the Reuenue uould remain reseraedto proceed further if theg so raant from the stage of ttreorder of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi.shAgarua| supra." "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in ttrc caseof Ashish Aganua| supro., as a one-time measureexercising the powers under Article 1a2 of theConstitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to [proceed]under the substituted prouisions, and this Courtallou-ting the petitions onlg on tle [procedural ]flaut, tLrcight confened on the Reuenue uould remain reseraedto proceed further if theg so raant from the stage of ttreorder of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi.shAgarua| supra." 6. In view of the same, we are inciined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingiy, thepresent Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection [of ]thepetitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn inaccordance with the amended [provision ]but [under ][the]un-amended provision which is otherwise [not ][sustainable.] 7. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batchmatters, the rights of the [parties ]would [stand ][reserved ][as ][is]envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the [said ][order]passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to [costs.] PSK,J & NTR,-i' W.P,No.2255 oJ 2O24 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAOASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY// <.. ,. UYSECTION OFFICER To,1. lncome. Tax Officer, Ward 1, Sangareddy, Veerabhadra Nagar, New BusAndhra [praOesh,6OiO0l ][---]1. lncome. Tax Officer, Ward 1, Sangareddy, Veerabhadra Nagar, New BusAndhra [praOesh,6OiO0l ][---]_ [Stand, ][Veerabhadra ][Nagar, ][Sang'areddy', ]2. The Principal Chief C^omhission6r of tn6ome Tax Ap A iS, ibth Fioor, C_2. The Principal Chief C^omhission6r of tn6ome Tax Ap A iS, ibth Fioor, C_ [ElocK, ][t. ][t. ][towers, ][10-2-3, ][[A.C. ]][[Guards, ][Hyderabad_500004.]][[Hyderabad_500004.]]3. The Assessment The Assessment Assessment [[10-2-3, ]][[A.C. ]][[Guards, ][Hyderabad_500004.]][[Hyderabad_500004.]]3. The Assessment The Assessment Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Departri-rent, National FacelessAssessment.Centre, Delhi, Ministry of ['Finance, ]Room f.to. +Oi, ZnO Floor, E_Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-i l0OO3Assessment.Centre, Delhi, Ministry of ['Finance, ]Room f.to. +Oi, ZnO Floor, E_Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-i l0OO3 Nehru Stadium, Delhi-i l0OO34. One CC to SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN, Advocate tOpUCl DUNDU MANMOHAN, Advocate tOpUCl5. One CC to M/s. SUNDART R. ptSUpATt (Sr SC fdr tNCdME TAXDEPARTMENT) TOPUC]DEPARTMENT) TOPUC] 6. Two CD Copies BNGJP $ HIGH COURT DATED:31 10112024 ORDERWP.No.2255 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS @)c"ri*,,+ . [\- ][-,1,]f L L'. :, ..\ ,,,,