Wp/15023/2023 Of Jeevraj Patel v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND PRESENT THE HONOURABLE [P. ] ANDTHE HONOURABLE JUSTICE [N. ] WRIT PETITION[Nos.: ][15023 ][& ][150][220F ][2][023] WRIT PETITIO N NO:15[0230F ][2023:] Between:.leevrai Patel. S/o Late Kheta [Patel, ][Aged about ][72 ][years, ][Occ]1l-ls-'r,J, Sri Nagar, [L.B ][Nagar, ][Hyderabad-500074'] Nil Rl/o ...PETITIONER AND 1The Assistant Commissioner [of ][lncome Tax, ][Central Circle-3 ][(2), ][Ayakar]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, [Hyderabad ][-500 ][004, ][Telangana']Bhavan, Basheerbagh, [Hyderabad ][-500 ][004, ][Telangana'] The Addltional commissioner [of ][lncome Tax, ][central ][Range -3, ][Hyderabad.] 2 The Principal, ClT, [Cenkal Circle' Ayakar ][Bhavan, ][Basheerbagh' Hyderabad]500 004.500 004. 3 4The Union of lndia, [Represented ][by its Secretary ][to the Government']odpartiireirioiRerenu'e [Ministry of ][Finance, ][Nei'v ][Delhi ][110 001']odpartiireirioiRerenu'e [Ministry of ][Finance, ][Nei'v ][Delhi ][110 001'] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article [226 ][of ][the constitution ][of ][lndia praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances [stated ][in ][the ][affidavit ][filed ][therewith, ][the ][High court. ][may ][be]pleasedtoissueanappropriatewrit,orderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinlhe nature of [Writ ][oi ][Certiorari declarihg ][that the ][Assessment ][Order ][dated]iO.OC,ZS [passed by ][the ][1st Respondenlfor ][th-e.Assessment ][Year ][2019-2020],ia" Of N & brder No [ITBA/ASTtSt'1SSC2OZZ-23/1050993557(1) ][under section]rse c ot the lncome [Tax ][Act, ][1961 ][iS ][illegal' ][highhanded' ][discriminatory,]unreasonable, [uniust and ][violative ][ol ][principles ][of ][natural ][justice ][and]Articl€s "ibitr"ry, i4, 2.1 and [30oA ][oi ][the constitution of lndia and ][consequently to quash]the said Assessment [Order dated 20.03.2023'] lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 assessment [order ][daled 20.03.2023 passed ][u/s]153 C of the Act and also the demand [notice dated ][20 ][-03 ][-2023 ][issued ][u/s ][153D]of the Act pending disposal of the [Writ ][Pelition.] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.V. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: [Ms. B. SAPNA ] FOR Ms. K. MAMATA Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI [B. iTIUKERJEE ] SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA WRlT PETITION NO: 15022 OF 2023: Between: JeevrajPatel, S/o Late Kheta Patel, Aged aboul [72 years, Occ, Nil ][R/o. ][1't-]15-7, JSri Nagar, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad-500074. PETITIONER AND 1The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Circle-3 (2), ][Ayakar]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 ]004, [Telangana.]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 ]004, [Telangana.] 2The Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Range -3, Hyderabad] 3The Principal, ClT, Central Circle, Ayakar Bhavan, [Basheerbagh, Hyderabad ][-]500 004.500 004. 4The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to [the Government,]Department of Revenue Minlstry of Finance, [New Delhi ][1 ]['10 ][001 ][.]Department of Revenue Minlstry of Finance, [New Delhi ][1 ]['10 ][001 ][.] ...RESPONDENTS WRlT PETITION NO: 15022 OF 2023: Between: JeevrajPatel, S/o Late Kheta Patel, Aged aboul [72 years, Occ, Nil ][R/o. ][1't-]15-7, JSri Nagar, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad-500074. PETITIONER AND 1The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Circle-3 (2), ][Ayakar]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 ]004, [Telangana.]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 ]004, [Telangana.] 2The Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Range -3, Hyderabad] 3The Principal, ClT, Central Circle, Ayakar Bhavan, [Basheerbagh, Hyderabad ][-]500 004.500 004. 4The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to [the Government,]Department of Revenue Minlstry of Finance, [New Delhi ][1 ]['10 ][001 ][.]Department of Revenue Minlstry of Finance, [New Delhi ][1 ]['10 ][001 ][.] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of [lndia praying ][that in ][the]circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, [the ][High ][Court ][may ][be]pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or, direction more [particularly ][one ][in]the nature of Writ of Certiorari declaring [that ][the ][Assessment ][Order ][dated]20.03.2023 passed by the 15t Respondent [for the ][Assessment ][Year ][2019- ][20]vide DIN and Order No. ITBA/ASTlsl [153C12022-2311051015153('l) ][under]section 153 C r.w.s. 144 of the lncome [Tax ][Act, ][1961 ][is ][illegal, ][highhanded']discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable, [unjust ][and ][violative ][of ][principles ][of]natural [justice ]and Articles 14,21 and 3004 of the [Constitution ][of ][lndia ][and]consequently to quash the said Assessmdnt Order [dated ][20.O3.2023 ][-] lA NO: 2 OF 2023 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 assessment [order dated 20.03.2023 passed ][u/s]153 C read with section 144 of the Act and also [the ][demand ][notice ][dated]20.O3.2023 issued u/s 156 of the Act [pending ][disposal ][of the ][Writ ][Petition.] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.V. RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.l to 3: Ms. B. FOR Ms. K. MAMATA counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI B: MUKERJEE SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUWSOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER o THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAIU KOSHYAND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIW.P. Nos.15O23 & 15O22 of 2o23 COMMON ORDER:(per Hon'bte Srt Justice p.SArt KoSHy) Heard Mr. V. V. Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner;Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned counsel representing Ms. K. Mamata,learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department,appearing for respondent Nos.l to 3 and learned counsel Mr. B.Mukerjee, learned counsel representing learned Depufy SolicitorGeneral of India appearing for respondent No.4. perused the entirerecord. 2. Since the factual aspects in both the writ petitions are similarin nature, we proceed to decide the two writ petitions by way of thiscommon order. 3. These are the two writ petitions_ which are being filedchallenging the Assessment Order dated 20.03.2023 passed byrespondent No.1 for the Assessmentyear 2OlZ-18 and 20l9-2O underSection l53C of the Income Tax Act, 196l (hereinafter referred to asActJ. 4. Conscious of the fact that there is a statutory appeal availablewith the Department, we have entertained the writ petition on theground raised by the learned counsel for the pet.itioner that therespondent authorities while passing the impugned order has not 2. Since the factual aspects in both the writ petitions are similarin nature, we proceed to decide the two writ petitions by way of thiscommon order. 3. These are the two writ petitions_ which are being filedchallenging the Assessment Order dated 20.03.2023 passed byrespondent No.1 for the Assessmentyear 2OlZ-18 and 20l9-2O underSection l53C of the Income Tax Act, 196l (hereinafter referred to asActJ. 4. Conscious of the fact that there is a statutory appeal availablewith the Department, we have entertained the writ petition on theground raised by the learned counsel for the pet.itioner that therespondent authorities while passing the impugned order has not considered the documents which the petitioner had produced beforethe authorities in response to the Notice issued under Section 142 (l)of the Act as early as on 19.0g.2 O22. lt was further contented by theof the Act as early as on 19.0g.2 O22. lt was further contented by thelearned counsel for the petitioner that in addition to these documentsbeing made available w.ith the respondent authorities on L9.Og.2022,yet another notice dated 27.01.2023 was issued to the petitioner toyet another notice dated 27.01.2023 was issued to the petitioner toproduce required information as called for, wherein again, thepetitioner had in the format submitted the documents to theauthorities as sought for by the Department which was already beensubmitted online on 19.O8.2O22. In addition to this, learned counselauthorities as sought for by the Department which was already beensubmitted online on 19.O8.2O22. In addition to this, learned counselsubmits that upon the receipt of Notice fixing the date of personalhearing to be held on 23.02.2023, the petitioner had authorizedM/s. Maheshkumar B. Sumbad & Associates, to represent on behalfM/s. Maheshkumar B. Sumbad & Associates, to represent on behalfof him during the personal hearing on the said date. In response tothe said notice, the autJrorized person i.e., M/s. Maheshkumar B.Sumbad & Associates had entered appearance before the authoritiesand made his submissions. In addition, the said representative of thepetitioner had also produced a series of documents from thepetitioner had also produced a series of documents from theAssessment Year 20l5-16 up till the Assessment year 2O2l_22. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of all the abovesaid documents being made available to the respondent authorities,respondent No. I whi.le passing the irnpugned order has beenrepeatedly mentioning that the petitioner has not responded to thenotices issued from time to time and in the absence of the availabre I records sought for from the petitioner, the Assessment Ofhcer haspassed the assessment order. This according to the petitioner is arrorder which has been passed without proper application of mind andpassed the assessment order. This according to the petitioner is arrorder which has been passed without proper application of mind andalso without discussing any of the documents which were alreadymade available to the Department, first on lg.Oa.2O22 andsubsequently, on O3.O2.2O23 and finally again on 23.02.2023 duirngthe personal hearing. Thus, learned counsel for the petitioner prayedfor the quashment of the impugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23.for the quashment of the impugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23. I records sought for from the petitioner, the Assessment Ofhcer haspassed the assessment order. This according to the petitioner is arrorder which has been passed without proper application of mind andpassed the assessment order. This according to the petitioner is arrorder which has been passed without proper application of mind andalso without discussing any of the documents which were alreadymade available to the Department, first on lg.Oa.2O22 andsubsequently, on O3.O2.2O23 and finally again on 23.02.2023 duirngthe personal hearing. Thus, learned counsel for the petitioner prayedfor the quashment of the impugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23.for the quashment of the impugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the Department opposing thepetition submits that it is a case where the impugned order is onewhich is appealable before the Appellate Authority and therefore, thewrit petition could not be entertained. Further, it was also contendedby the learned counsel that the grounds raised by the petitioner areall factual in nature, which again would be one which needs to betraced out in an appeal and the Appellate Authority would have theliberty of perusing the records of the Assessing Oflicer. Lastly, it wascontended that from the perusal of the pleadings attached to the writpetition as also from the reading of the impugned order, it wouldclearly indicate that the petitioner has been deliberately avoiding thenotices which were issued from time to time by not furnishing theentire details of documents sought for and also by not giving properreply to the show cause notice and other notices those were issued tothe petitioner except for furnishing half baked documents. Therefore,for all these reasons, the writ petition shall not be entertained. 7 ' Having gone through the submissions made by . [the ][learned]counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the records, admittedly,there were a series of notices which were issued by the Department to. [the ][learned]counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the records, admittedly,there were a series of notices which were issued by the Department tothe petitioner. Though the petitioner does not seem to have given anyspecific reply to the show cause notice as such or to any of the noticesearlier issued, what is not in dispute is the fact that the petitioner didon 19.o8.2022 produce before the authorities certain documentsreproduced herein under:specific reply to the show cause notice as such or to any of the noticesearlier issued, what is not in dispute is the fact that the petitioner didon 19.o8.2022 produce before the authorities certain documentsreproduced herein under: " 1 . Copy of Noti ce 142(71 2. Copy of ITR 3. Copy of Computation of Income 4. List of Bank Accounts 5. List of Cash Deposited 6. Copy of Gift Deed ro Son". 8. Given the fact that the said documents were submitted by thepetitioner on 79.08.2022, the acknowredgement on the document alsoreflects that the office to have received the same on the same dayitself. The document has the seal and endorsernent of receipt. Inaddition, in response to the subsequent Notice dated, 27.O1.2O23, thepetitioner again made a submission reiterat.ing the fact that they havealready submittedrequired documents and information on19.08.2022 itself.Yet again, these very documents were againscanned and uploaded to the respondent authorities on 03.02.2023.Lastly, we lrnd that date of personal hearing was given on 23.02.2023.On the said date, ttre petitioner was represented by an agency i.e.,M/s. Maheshkumar B. Sumbad & Associates, who again, in turn had 6. Copy of Gift Deed ro Son". 8. Given the fact that the said documents were submitted by thepetitioner on 79.08.2022, the acknowredgement on the document alsoreflects that the office to have received the same on the same dayitself. The document has the seal and endorsernent of receipt. Inaddition, in response to the subsequent Notice dated, 27.O1.2O23, thepetitioner again made a submission reiterat.ing the fact that they havealready submittedrequired documents and information on19.08.2022 itself.Yet again, these very documents were againscanned and uploaded to the respondent authorities on 03.02.2023.Lastly, we lrnd that date of personal hearing was given on 23.02.2023.On the said date, ttre petitioner was represented by an agency i.e.,M/s. Maheshkumar B. Sumbad & Associates, who again, in turn had produced the bunch of documents spreading from the Assessmentyear 2015-16 to 2O2l-22. However, when we peruse through theimpugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23 so far as the Assessment Year2Ol7-lA and 2Ol9-2O is concerned, it reflects that respondent No.1,while passing the Assessment Order has not dealt with any of theseimpugned order dated 2O.O3.2O23 so far as the Assessment Year2Ol7-lA and 2Ol9-2O is concerned, it reflects that respondent No.1,while passing the Assessment Order has not dealt with any of thesedocuments which were furnished by the petitioner and which werealso made available to the authorities concemed on the date ofpersonal hearing held on 23.02.2023. We also find that the Assessingalso made available to the authorities concemed on the date ofpersonal hearing held on 23.02.2023. We also find that the AssessingAuthority had also not reflected anywhere so far as the petitionerbeing given personal hearing and the pelitioner having availed thesame through his authorized representative. Neither is there anydiscussion in respect of the contentions raised by the representativein the course of personal hearing. For the aforesaid reason, we are ofthe considered opinion that it would be in the larger interests ofjustice if the matter is remitted back to respondent No.l only so far asthe considered opinion that it would be in the larger interests ofjustice if the matter is remitted back to respondent No.l only so far asreconsidering the assessment proceedings for the Assessment YearI2Ol7-la and 2Ol9-2O.I2Ol7-la and 2Ol9-2O. n 9. Considering the request made by the learned counsel for theDepartment that the petitioner may not take advantage of the order ofremand and protract the matters further. In order to cut short theperiod of proceedings, we hold that the petitioner shall now enterappearance before respondent No. I on 09.02.2024 for freshpersonal hearing to be afforded with a clear indication that there shallbe no request of adjournment made by the petitioner under any I I crrcumstances. The petitioner may either appear in _person orthrough his authorized representative and may refer to the documentsthat he has already produced before the authorities concerned inthrough his authorized representative and may refer to the documentsthat he has already produced before the authorities concerned inresponse to the two Assessment years for which the matter standsremitted back. Upon hearing the petitioner on Og.O2.2024,respondent No.1 is expected to take a decision within a further periodof three (3) weeks from 09.O2.2O24.respondent No.1 is expected to take a decision within a further periodof three (3) weeks from 09.O2.2O24. 10. With the aforesaid direction, both the writ petitions are partlyallowed and the matter stands remitted back to respondent No.l forfresh reconsideration of the Assessment. The Assessment order underchallenge dated 20.03.2023 stands set aside to the aforesaid extent.No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallstald closed.stald closed. SD/-K.AMMAJIASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY//./{r/ISECTION OFFICER 10. With the aforesaid direction, both the writ petitions are partlyallowed and the matter stands remitted back to respondent No.l forfresh reconsideration of the Assessment. The Assessment order underchallenge dated 20.03.2023 stands set aside to the aforesaid extent.No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallstald closed.stald closed. SD/-K.AMMAJIASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY//./{r/ISECTION OFFICER To,1The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Circle-3 ][(2)' ][Ayakar]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 004, Telangana.]1The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central [Circle-3 ][(2)' ][Ayakar]Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad [-500 004, Telangana.]2The Adiiitional Cominissi6ner of lncome Tax, Central [Range ][-3, ][Hyderabad-]3The Principal, ClT, Central Circle, Ayakar [Bhavan, ][Basheerbagh, ][Hyderabad]500 004.3The Principal, ClT, Central Circle, Ayakar [Bhavan, ][Basheerbagh, ][Hyderabad]500 004.4The Secretary to the Government, [Departrnent of ][Revenue Ministry ][of]Financ€, The Union of lndia, New Delhi [110 ]001.Financ€, The Union of lndia, New Delhi [110 ]001.5One CC to SRI V,V. RAMANA, Advocate t)One CC to Ms. K. MAMATA, SC FOR INCOME 7One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN [KUMAR, DY. ] rNDrA {OPUCIt)One CC to Ms. K. MAMATA, SC FOR INCOME 7One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN [KUMAR, DY. ] rNDrA {OPUCI8.Two CD CopiesBNBN LS r HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED:30l01tZOZ4 ORDER WP.Nos.15023 &15022 of 2023 1t\ ()(l,'J11 [ttB ][z0'2r ]F* O';gy-'Sit) PARTLY ALLOWNG BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONSWITHOUT COSTS lo