Wp/15169/2022 Of Sri Sai Kumar Mateti v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 15169 OF 2022 Between: Sri Sai Kumar lvlateti, Plot No. 8/C, Power Loom Block, Kattedan, Rajendra Nagar,Ranga Reddy - 500077, Telangana ...PETITIONER AND 1lncome Tax Officer, Ward 8(1 ), Signature Towers, Opp. Botanical Gardens,Kondapur, Hyderabad.Kondapur, Hyderabad. 2National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry ofFinance, Room No.401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlala Nehru Stadium,Delhi.Finance, Room No.401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlala Nehru Stadium,Delhi. ...RESPONDENTS Petitlon under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ ofmandamus holding that the Notice dated 3110312021 issued by the ['l ]stRespondent with DIN and Notice No. ITBA/ASTlsl14Bl2O20-2111032100356(1) isnonest in law and consequently hold that the reassessment proceedingsconducted by the 2nd Respondent pursuant to the said notice, is illegal andwithout [jurisdiction ]and set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stayall further proceedings on the file of 2nd Respondent taken up pursuant to issuance of notice dated 31/03/2021 issued under section ['148 ][of ][the ][Act ][with ] and Notice No. ITBA/AST/Sl [1 ]4812020-2111 [032 ][1 ]00356( [1 ]). lA NO: 2 OF 2022 Between: 1. lncome Tax Officer, Ward 8(1), Signature Towers, Opp. [Botanical ]Gardens,Kondapur, Hyderabad.Kondapur, Hyderabad. 2. National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, [Ministry ][of]Finance, Room No.401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlala Nehru Stadium,Delhi.Finance, Room No.401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlala Nehru Stadium,Delhi. .,.PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND Sri Sai Kumar Mateti, Plot No. B/C, Power Loom Block, Kattedan, Rajendra Nagar,Ranga Reddy - 500077 , Telangana RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 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 ]tovacate the interim order in l.A.NO.1/2022 in W.P.No.15169 of 2022, [dt.]24.03.2022. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A.RADHA KRISHNA, [(Sr. ]SC For lT DEPT) The Court made the following: ORDER Y THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJIWRIT PETITION No.15169 OF 2022 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KoSHY) The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the notice,dated 31.O3.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short "the Act, 1961") for reassessment for the AssessmentYear 2013-14 on the ground of escape assessment within themeaning of Section 147 of the Act, 196I. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A.RADHA KRISHNA, [(Sr. ]SC For lT DEPT) The Court made the following: ORDER Y THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJIWRIT PETITION No.15169 OF 2022 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KoSHY) The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the notice,dated 31.O3.2021 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short "the Act, 1961") for reassessment for the AssessmentYear 2013-14 on the ground of escape assessment within themeaning of Section 147 of the Act, 196I. 2. This Court, while entertaining this Writ Petition on24.03.2022, on the ground that impugned notice did not bear thesignature of the issuing authority either manua-l or digital, hadstayed further proceedings of the impugned notice. TheDepartment was put on notice aIId they have hled their counter.In the counter, the respondents, though contended that the noticeunder Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has been duly served upon theassessee, and the assessee had duly entered appearance before theauthority concerned, and submitted their response. Subsequently,notice under Section 151 of the Act, 1961 [was ][also issued ][which]was duly signed with digital signature. Therefore, in [case ][if ][a]notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 does not [bear ][a ][digitaJ] PSI(,J & IV?&JW.p.No. tst69 of 2O22 srgnaturc by itself would notrender the said document eithernon-est or bad in law. 3. It would would be relevant at this juncture to take this juncture to take juncture to take to take take note of the factof the factthe factfactthat Annexure-pl which is put to challenge in this Writ petition isthe same document which is also being enclosed by theDepartment along with their counter as Annexure R_2. Both thesedocuments which are one and the same, and do not bear eithermarual signature or the digrtal signature of the authoritvconcerned who issued the same. It would would be relevant at this juncture to take this juncture to take juncture to take to take take note of the factof the factthe factfact 4. In this context, it would be relevant at this juncture to takenote of the provision of Section 2g2(A) ol the Act, i96 1. and forready reference, it is reproduced hereunder:_ "2824. (l) Where this Act requires a notice or other docLtmentto be issued bg-anA lncome-tax authoritA, such notice or otherdoaiment shall be siqned and issuJd in paper form oraccordance communicated u.tith in such eleitronic procedurZ as jr;" ma{ oo be ,no["noirrnoary pr""ii.a.i, giue.n (2) Euery notice for the purposes or other of document this Act to be issued, serued. orig [-""i"'ii;;"rr.]and authoitg. offtt:e shatt be of _a designated deemed_ to be income_tax authenicate'; authoritA i';;""o*"is pnnted.,stamped or othenuise uitten thereon. F), [fo.r. ][n1 ]ny_ncoses o/ Ihr's section, a designated income_taxi,yrn?:rA the Board [shall ]to [mean anA income-tox ]issue, serue or giue [authiitg ]such Totice [autLnised ]or otherbydocument afi.er authentication in the manner i- priiana insub-section (2)." I ,f 4.7 PSK,J & NTR,Jw.P.No.75769 o:f 2022 giue.n (2) Euery notice for the purposes or other of document this Act to be issued, serued. orig [-""i"'ii;;"rr.]and authoitg. offtt:e shatt be of _a designated deemed_ to be income_tax authenicate'; authoritA i';;""o*"is pnnted.,stamped or othenuise uitten thereon. F), [fo.r. ][n1 ]ny_ncoses o/ Ihr's section, a designated income_taxi,yrn?:rA the Board [shall ]to [mean anA income-tox ]issue, serue or giue [authiitg ]such Totice [autLnised ]or otherbydocument afi.er authentication in the manner i- priiana insub-section (2)." I ,f 4.7 PSK,J & NTR,Jw.P.No.75769 o:f 2022 5. From the plain reading of the aJoresaid provision of lawunder sub-Section (1) of Section 282A clearly envisages that whenthe Department intends to issue a notice, the same has to be dulysigned either manually or digita,lly. The said provision has amandatory force of law. This requirement under sub-Section (1) ofSection 282A is missing in the notice issued under Section 148 ofthe Act, 196 1 by the Department. Since there is a mandatoryrequirement for compliance of sub-Section (1) and (2) of Section282A, and, in the absence of there being a signature either manualor digital of the authority concerned issuing the same, which is therequirement under sub-Section (1), we are of the consideredopinion that the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 to theaforesaid extent is bad in law and the consequential proceedingsinitiated wouid also therefore become bad. Thus, we a-re of theconsidered opinion that the impugned notice under Section 148 ofthe Act, 1961 therefore requires to be set-aside/quashed, and isaccordingly set-aside. 6. However, the right of the respondent - Department standsreserved to initiate appropriate proceedings afresh, if they so , I PS.I(,J 66 fffR,JW.P.No.15769 of 2022 desire, against the assessee, subject to the initiation being inaccordance with law. The right of the Department is beingreserved only for the reason that the interference by this Court isonly on technicality of the notice issued under Section 148 of theAct, 1961 having not met the requirement as is prescribed underSection 282(Ll(l) ofthe Act, 1961. 7. In view of the above discussions, this Writ Petition standsallowed. There shall be no order as to costs Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,shall stand closed Sd/. K. VENKAIAHASSISTANT "i'1'/ //TRUE COPY// SECTION To,1The lncome [Tax ][Officer, ][Ward ][8(1)' ][Signature ][Towers' ][Opp ][Botanical]eridens, KondaPur, [HYderabad']1The lncome [Tax ][Officer, ][Ward ][8(1)' ][Signature ][Towers' ][Opp ][Botanical]eridens, KondaPur, [HYderabad']2The lrilinistrv of [Finance, ][r'laiiiial ][Faceless Assessment ][Centre' lncome ][Tax]ffi#iH;i [n"l, ][r'r"lor' ][iiJir"6i' ][i-namp' ][Jawaharlala Nehru ][stadium']Delhi.ffi#iH;i [n"l, ][r'r"lor' ][iiJir"6i' ][i-namp' ][Jawaharlala Nehru ][stadium']Delhi..)6il"cc to SRI [A.V.RAGHU RAM, Advocate- ][t-oPy-cl-]46nE EE i" [Siii ][n.nnbHA ][(irbrii'rir, ][iS..' ][Sc ][For ][rr ][oEPr)' ][[oPUc]]qTwo CD CoPies.46nE EE i" [Siii ][n.nnbHA ][(irbrii'rir, ][iS..' ][Sc ][For ][rr ][oEPr)' ][[oPUc]]qTwo CD CoPies.BSKMP .-.PMP .-.P HIGH COURT DATED:0611112023 ORDER WP.No.15169 of 2022 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS 1tr [G](qoo2 [tll! ][2i23]o**DEATcf-o