Wp/12017/2024 Of Pushpalatha Katroth v. The Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABADAT HYDERABAD(Special Originat Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF IVAYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE SUJOY PAULANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 12017 0F 2024I Between: Pushpalatha Katroth, D/o.Swa1y [Katroth, ][Occ. ][Teacher, Aged About ][48]years, H. No. 10-7-203New Dilsukhnagar, Dwarakapuram, L.B. Nagar,Rangareddy - 500060.Swa1y [Katroth, ][Occ. ][Teacher, Aged About ][48]years, H. No. 10-7-203New Dilsukhnagar, Dwarakapuram, L.B. Nagar,Rangareddy - 500060 ...PET|T|ONER AND 1. The lncgme TaxlOfficer, Ward 9(i ), Hyderabad, I T Tower, AC Guards, [I\rlasab ][Tank. ][Hyderabad, Telangana, ][[500004.]]2. The Principal Chief Commission-er of lncome Tax Ap and [[500004.]]2. The Principal Chief Commission-er of lncome Tax Ap and TS, 1Oth Floor, C-3. - The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Departrirent, National Facelessqlock, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ivlinistry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003.3. - The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Departrirent, National Facelessqlock, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ivlinistry 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 iin the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may becircumstances stated iin the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in thenature of Writ of [i; ]N/andamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt.24lO2l2O24passed by the 3rdrespondent uls 147 r.w.s14411448 of the lncome-taxAct for A.Y. 2016-17'ivide DIN No. ITBA/ AST/S t14il2023-24 10614sO779(1),ccnsequentto the order passed u/s 148A(d) dt.22lO3lZO23 vide DIN No.24lO2l2O24passed by the 3rdrespondent uls 147 r.w.s14411448 of the lncome-taxAct for A.Y. 2016-17'ivide DIN No. ITBA/ AST/S t14il2023-24 10614sO779(1),ccnsequentto the order passed u/s 148A(d) dt.22lO3lZO23 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/F/148A12022-2311051118256(1) ,and the notice u/s 148 dt.25to3t2o23vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl 148 112022-2311051297068(1), issued by the JA0(1st:vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl 148 112022-2311051297068(1), issued by the JA0(1st:respondent) instead of FA0(3rd respondent),as void, illegal, and contrary to theProvisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. 1,Ii/lpl: lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstzrnces stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be p,leased to stayall further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order dt. 24lc)2l2o24passedby the 3rdrespondent u/s 147 r.w.s14411448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.Y. 2016-17 vide DIN No. ITBATiAST/ 51147 12023-2411061450779('1 ), and may pass suchother order(s) as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interests ofsubstantial [justice, ]as otherwise the Petitioner would be put to irreparable loss andsevere injury. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHANGounsel for the Respondents: M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY FOR SRI J.V.PRASAD,SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.L20t7 0F 2024 ORDER: (1:er Hon'ble Justice Sujog paul) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan, learned counsel for thepetitioner(s) and Ms B. Sapna Reddy, learned counselrepresenting Sri J.V. Prasad, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHANGounsel for the Respondents: M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY FOR SRI J.V.PRASAD,SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.L20t7 0F 2024 ORDER: (1:er Hon'ble Justice Sujog paul) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan, learned counsel for thepetitioner(s) and Ms B. Sapna Reddy, learned counselrepresenting Sri J.V. Prasad, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents. 2. The ground taken by the learned counsel for thetaken by the learned counsel for theby the learned counsel for thethe learned counsel for thelearned counsel for thefor thethepetitioner is that in furtherance of Financ e Act, 2O2l , re-assessment process stood modified but the respondents havenot taken care of it and therefore notice issued under Section148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot sustain judicialscrutiny. Since notice is bad in law, the consequential ordersare also bad in law. The ground taken by the learned counsel for thetaken by the learned counsel for theby the learned counsel for thethe learned counsel for thelearned counsel for thefor thethe 3. During 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 2022ald other connected matters, decided common orderby dated 14.O9.2023. The parties agreed that this matter [rnay ][be]disposed of in terms of the Common Order dated 14.O9 [.2023] 4. This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022, heid as underW.P.No.25903 of 2022, heid as under "35. [In ][view ][of the ][aforesaid discussions, ][it ][is ][by ][now ][very]clear that the procedure to be followed by the respondent-Department upon treatiEg the notices issued fot reassessmentbeing under Sectiotr 148A, the subsequent [proceedings ][was]Eandatorily required to be undertaken ulder the substitutedprovisions as laid dosn under the Firance Act, 2021. In theabsence of which, we are coastlained to hold that [the]procedure adopted by the respondent-Department is itl.contraveDtioa to the statute i.e. the Finance Act,2021, at [thc]first instance. Secondly, it is also in direct contraveation tothe directives issued by the tlon'ble Supreme Court iD th€case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 36. For all the aforesaid reasols, the impugned notices issuedaEd the procecdings drawn by the respondeot-Department isneither tenable, nor sustainable. The Eotices so issued aridthe procedure adopted being per se illegal, deserves to be andare accordingly set aside/quaahed. As a cousequence, all the:impugned orders getting quashed, the consequential order{ipassed by the respondeDt Department pursuant to the noticesissued under Section 147 and 148 would also get quashed andit is ordered accordingly. The reason we are quashing thecoasequeatial order is on the principles that whe[ the,initiation of the proceedings itself t as procedurally wrong.,the subsequeat orders also [gets ]nullified automatically.37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitionet istsustained and all these writ petitions stands allowed on thi.ivery jurisdictional issue. Siace the impugned notices andtorders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we arenot iacliled to proceed further aad decide the other issuesraised by the petitioner which stands reserved to be raisedand contended in an appropriate proceedi[gs.38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, iu the case olfAshish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising thepowets uuder Article 142 of the Constitution of India. i.!t.: \ i.!t.: \ pormitted tho Rcl,enu€ to proceed utrder th€ substitutedprovisions, and this Court allowing the petitions only on theprocedutal flae, the right conferted on the Rewenue wouldtemain reserved to proceed further if they so qrant from thetemain reserved to proceed further if they so qrant from thestage of the ordcr of the Suprerre Couit in the case of AshishAgarwal, supra.39. No ordet as to costs."Agarwal, supra.39. No ordet as to costs." 5. In view of the consensus arrived, the impugned Show Cause notice and consequential orders passed in this writpetition are set aside. Liberty is reserved to both the partiesto take respective stand and to proceed in accordalce withlaw as per paragraph No.38 of the order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022to take respective stand and to proceed in accordalce withlaw as per paragraph No.38 of the order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022 6. The writ petition is allowed. No costs. Interlocutoryapplications, if any pending, shall afso stand closed. SD/-V.KAVITHAASSISTANT RAGISIRAR\\ /t!/SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY/I To 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad, T Tower, AC [Guards,]Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500004.Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500004. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax AP and [TS, ][1 ][Oth ][Floor, ] 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 Faceless] Assessment Centre, Delhi, [IVlinistry ]of Finance, [Room ][No. ][401 ],2nd [Floor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi--l 10003.Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi--l 10003. 4. One CC to SRI DUNDU TVANIVOHAN, Advocate 5. One CC to SRI J.V.PRASAD, SC FOR [INCOI\4E ] 6. Two CD Copies 16. Two CD Copies 1 PSK MR I HIGH COURT DATED:01 10512024 liORDERWP.No.12017 ot 2024 -.p[.r'[/\r ] [(i^]1qlJ\N [1[1\].) li?1i,l1(). ,(._'?Il;r 1;f [i ]['' ][')" ]"'.' ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS. \>