Wp/14742/2025 Of Ikigai Ken Foundation v. Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH TWO THOUSAND PRESENT THE HONOURABLE [JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY]AND THE HONOURABLE [JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA] WRIT PETITI NO: [1][ 47420F ][2025] Between: lkioai Ken Foundation. [(A ]Section [8 ][Company registered under ][the ][Companies Act']zbi5l n". ioi-ozz.n.i. [Guards, ][Anand ][Nag-ar ][Khairatabad, ][Hvderabad,.l"l?!9.11"]- SOObO+ Represented by [its Director, ][Shri. ][Naga ][Venkata ][Murali ][Krishna ][Mullapuql.] ,....PETITIONER AND 1. lncome Tax Officer, [Exemption ][Ward ][1(2), Hyd ][Aayakar ][Bhavan, ][Near ] Stadium Hyderabad, [Telangana ]- [500004-]Stadium Hyderabad, [Telangana ]- [500004-] 2. Commissioner of [Income ][Tax (Exemptions), Aayakar Bhavan' ][Near ] Stadium Hyderabad, [Telangana.]Stadium Hyderabad, [Telangana.] 3.CentralBoardofDirectTaxes,Centralsecretariat,NorthBlock,NewDelhi-- iroooi nepr.sent"a byAssessment officer, National Faceless AssessmentCentre.Centre. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Anicle [226 ][of ][the constitution ][of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances [stated ][in ][the ][affidavit ][filed ][therewith, ][the ][High ][court ][may ][be]pleasedtoissueanappropriateWritordirectionmoreparticularlyinthenatureofWrit of Certiorari to set [aside ][the ][assessment ][order ][bearing ][No']DINbyITBAJAST/S/143(3)12024-2511072717060(1) [dated ][3010112025 ][passed]and [all ][actions consequent and attendant thereto']Respondent No. [3 ] l.A.NO:2 OF 2025 Petition Under section 151 cpc praying that in the crrcumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to staythe operation of the impugned assessment order in Exhibit p3 bearing No. DINrTBA/AST/S/ 1 43(3)t2024_25t 1 07 27 17 060(1)dated 30.01.2025 passed byrTBA/AST/S/ 1 43(3)t2024_25t 1 07 27 17 060(1)dated 30.01.2025 passed byRespondent No.3, including any recovery,penalty and consequent actionsattendant thereto.attendant thereto. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI SANTOSH SAGAR KAptLAVAt Counsel for the Respondents : SRI VtJAy K.PUNNA (SEN|OR SC FOR CB|C)The Court made the following ORDERThe Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE [P.SAM ] ANDTHE HONOURABLE NANDIKONDA WRIT PETIT [No. 14742 ][of2025] C)RDER, [(per ][Hon'ble ][Sri ][.lustice ] [Sam Koshy)] Heard Mr. Santosh [Sagar ][Kapilavai, ][learned ][counsel fbr]the petitioner [and ][Mr. ][Vijay ][K' ][Punna' ][leaned ][Senior ][Standing]Counsel for [the ][lncome ][Tax ][Department appearing ][lor ][the]respondents. [Perused ][the record']2. The challenge [in ][the ][present ][writ ][petition ][is ][to ][the]assessment [order, ][dated ][30.Ol ]'2024, [for ][the ][assessment ][year 2023-]2024. 3. The challenge [prirnarily ][was ][that ][of ][notices thosc ][werc]issued by the [Department ][in ][the ][initiai ][stage ][bef-ore ][the ][notice]under Section [l4? ][(1) of ][the ][Income Tax ][Act' ][i96l ][(fbr ][short'thc]Act') [was ][issue<i ][to the petitioner ][company ][were ][not ][hrstly' ][issued]in favour [of ][the ][company' ][Secondly, ][it ][r'vas ][never servcd upon ][the]petitioner company [and ][thirdly ][it ][was ][issued ][to ][the ][one ][of ][thc]Directors, viz.,Mr. [Krishna ][Rao, ][who ][do not ][have ][much ][saf ][in ][the]role of the [company ][and ][it ][was ][not ][the email ] [on ][rl'hich ][the]petitioner company [has been ][submitting ][its ][retums ][since ][past] 3. The challenge [prirnarily ][was ][that ][of ][notices thosc ][werc]issued by the [Department ][in ][the ][initiai ][stage ][bef-ore ][the ][notice]under Section [l4? ][(1) of ][the ][Income Tax ][Act' ][i96l ][(fbr ][short'thc]Act') [was ][issue<i ][to the petitioner ][company ][were ][not ][hrstly' ][issued]in favour [of ][the ][company' ][Secondly, ][it ][r'vas ][never servcd upon ][the]petitioner company [and ][thirdly ][it ][was ][issued ][to ][the ][one ][of ][thc]Directors, viz.,Mr. [Krishna ][Rao, ][who ][do not ][have ][much ][saf ][in ][the]role of the [company ][and ][it ][was ][not ][the email ] [on ][rl'hich ][the]petitioner company [has been ][submitting ][its ][retums ][since ][past] mallv yea's. Ilence, it has to be tieated that a notice issued underSection 133 (6) to the Directors to have not been properly served.4. On the other hand, the leamed Senior Standing Counsel forthe Incornc ['l-ar ]Dcpartrnent opposing the petition submits that thepetitioner at the outset ought to have availed the statutoryalternarive remedy of appeal before knocking the doors of thisCourt under the r.vrit jurisdiction. He further submits thatundoubtcdl_i., the notice under Section 133 (6) was issued to oneof the Directors of the petitioner company by narne Mr. KrishnaRao, and therc does not seem to have any dispute that the mailha'ing not becn received by the said Director of the saidcompan-v. ln view ol- the same the learned Senior StandingClounsel subnrits rhat rhe notice issued under Section 133 (6) hasto be accepted as duly served and the petitioner should not bepennittcd to take that ground now as the said emair ID wasregistered w.ith the Department, so far as the said personMr. Krishna Rao is concemed.5. Having heard the contentions putforth on either side and onperusal olthc records, what we find is that there appears to be twoDirectols irr the said company. The main Director is .\ Mr. N.V. Murali [Krishna Mullapudi, ][whose ][email ] [was ][the]same that [the company ][has ][and ][it ][is the ][satne ][email ] [in ][which]the returns of the [company ][has been ][filed for ][the past ][many years']6. tt is also the case that [the ][said ][person ][viz., ][Mr' N'V. ][Murali]Krishna Mullapudi, [who ][was ][the ][main ][partner ][who ][runs ][the]company and not [the ][other ][person ][viz., Mr. ][Krishna ][Rao']7. Upon verification of [facts and also ][on ][a ][query ][put ][to ][the]lcamed Senior Standing [Counsel, admittedly, ][no ][notice ][under]Section 133 [(6) ][has been issued against ][the ][said ][Direclor ][viz', ][Mr']N.V. Murali Krishna [Mullapudi, ][whose ][ernail ][lD ][was ][that ][the]has and [on ][which ][the ][returns were also ][filed']company 8. However, the learned [Senior Standing Counsel ][submits ][that]so f-ar as Mr. [N.V. Murali ][Krishna ][Mullapudi ][is concemed, ][he ][too]was issued with a notice, [but ][the ][mail ][was ][sent ][on ][the ][enlail ] which was also been [used ][by Mr. ][Krishna ][Rao and ][therefbre' ][it]cannot be [presumed ][that ][Mr. ][N.V. ][Murali ][Krishna ][Mullapudi, ][was]not issued or served [with ][the notice.]g. Perusal of the [records ][would ][go ][to ][show ][that ][there ][is ][no]material produced by [the ][respondents ][showing ][thc ][registered]ernait of the two [padners ][viz', ][Mr' N'V' ][Murali ][Krishna]Il) Mullapudi and Mr. Krishna Rao to be same. Thus, we are of theconsidered opinion that there does not seem to be any noticeissued to the rnain Dircctor of the petitioner company viz.,Mr. N.V. N,lurali Krishna Mullapudi, and thus it can be safely saidthat there appears to bc denial of fair opportunity of hearing toone of the Directors ol- the company as also to the company.There|ore, rhe intpugned assessment order to the aforesaid extentis tiable to be intcrdicted with and the matter deserves to beremitred back lor a fiesh adjudication of the same.10. In viev,", of thc same. let a fresh notice under Section I33 (6)be issued to Mr. N.V. Murali Krishna Muilapudi, who has theemail ID of the conrpany. [.et the email be sent on the said emailID within a period of rwo weeks (02) and thereafter let thepetitioner. respond kr the said notice within a reasonable periodprovided by the respondenrs in the notice itself and thereafter theAssessing Ofllccr rnay proceed further and pass appropriateorders, in accordance with [aw. I l. Accordinqlv, the present writ petition stands allowed to theaforesaid extent. [-l'hcre ]shall be no order as to costs.aforesaid extent. [-l'hcre ]shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous [petitions ][pending, ][if ][any, ][shalt] stand closed SD/. B. REKHA RANIsTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To1 . The lncome Tax Officer, Exemption Ward [1(2), ][Hyd]LB Stadium Hyderabad, Telangana - [50.0004.]1 . The lncome Tax Officer, Exemption Ward [1(2), ][Hyd]LB Stadium Hyderabad, Telangana - [50.0004.] yakar Bhavan, Near 2. The Commissioner of lncome [Tax ]Exemptions, [Aayakar Bhavan, Near ] Stadium Hyderabad, Telangana.Stadium Hyderabad, Telangana. 3. The Assessment Officer, Central [Board ][of ][Direct Taxes, ][Central ][Secretariat,]North Block, New Delhi [1 ]10001 , National [Faceless ][Assessment ][Centre.]North Block, New Delhi [1 ]10001 , National [Faceless ][Assessment ][Centre.] 4. One CC to SRI SANTOSH SAGAR [KAPILAVAI, ][Advocate ] 5. One CC to SRI VUHAY [K.PUNNA ][(SENIOR SC ][FOR CBIC) ][Advocate]loPUCl5. One CC to SRI VUHAY [K.PUNNA ][(SENIOR SC ][FOR CBIC) ][Advocate]loPUCl 6. Two CD CopiesSABM HIGH COURT DATED:07 t07 t2O2S ORDERWP.No.14t42 of 2O2S ALLOWING THE W.PWTHOUT COSTS. -I r)R HF: .Si'4/t'.r,at.14 AUE Mo-\c+, TCHEL]