Wp/20664/2024 Of Renuka Orsu v. Income Tax Officer Ward 11 (1)

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No's: 20664 20728 AND 207640F 2024 W.P. No: 20664 OF 2024 Between: Renuka Orsu, Wio ONarsimha, Aged about 45 years, Occupation. Business,Plot No.23-5-2, Aditya Nagar, Pragathinagar Road, Near Srinivasa SteelTraders, Kukatpally, Hyderabad - 500072. ...PETITIONER AND 'l . incoin3 Tax Officer $/ard '1 1 (1), Hyderabad, Sigiraiura Tor,':rs Si' i!c.51P) ofkonCapur-. Sy.No.37(P) of Kothaguda, OPP Bctaricaj Gardens,Serlingampally, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad, Tela nga na-500064.konCapur-. Sy.No.37(P) of Kothaguda, OPP Bctaricaj Gardens,Serlingampally, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad, Tela nga na-500064.2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, AP and 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 ,Znd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003.Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,Znd 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 rssue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature ofWrit of I\4andamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt.12.O2.2024passed by the3rdrespondent uls 147 r.w.s 14411448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.Y. 2015.16vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl14712023-2411060781188(1), consequent to the orderpassed u/s 14BA(d) dt.02.04.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlFl148Al2O22-Writ of I\4andamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt.12.O2.2024passed by the3rdrespondent uls 147 r.w.s 14411448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.Y. 2015.16vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl14712023-2411060781188(1), consequent to the orderpassed u/s 14BA(d) dt.02.04.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlFl148Al2O22-2311042450786(1) and the notice u/s 148 d1.O3.O4.2O22 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/1148-112022-2311042455557(1), issued by the JAO (1't respondent) instead ofFAO(3rd respondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-taxAct and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice1148-112022-2311042455557(1), issued by the JAO (1't respondent) instead ofFAO(3rd respondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-taxAct and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice r lection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inrport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to staypursuant to the Assessment Order dt.12.02.2024passed,,-cnt u/s 147 t.w.s 14411448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.y. 201S-ro vide DlN No ITBA/AST/SI147 12023-2411060781 188(1) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. J. SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR TNCOME TAX DEPT) W.P. NO: 20728 OF 2024 Between: RenukaOrsu, Wio ONarsimha, Aged about 45 years, Occupation. Business,Plot No.23-5-2. Aditya Nagar, pragathinagar hoad, trteal Sfnlvasa Sieeilrad.rs. K'rk: rp.rllT H7C:rab:1 50AA72.Plot No.23-5-2. Aditya Nagar, pragathinagar hoad, trteal Sfnlvasa Sieeilrad.rs. K'rk: rp.rllT H7C:rab:1 50AA72. ...PETITIONER AND r lection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inrport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to staypursuant to the Assessment Order dt.12.02.2024passed,,-cnt u/s 147 t.w.s 14411448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.y. 201S-ro vide DlN No ITBA/AST/SI147 12023-2411060781 188(1) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. J. SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR TNCOME TAX DEPT) W.P. NO: 20728 OF 2024 Between: RenukaOrsu, Wio ONarsimha, Aged about 45 years, Occupation. Business,Plot No.23-5-2. Aditya Nagar, pragathinagar hoad, trteal Sfnlvasa Sieeilrad.rs. K'rk: rp.rllT H7C:rab:1 50AA72.Plot No.23-5-2. Aditya Nagar, pragathinagar hoad, trteal Sfnlvasa Sieeilrad.rs. K'rk: rp.rllT H7C:rab:1 50AA72. ...PETITIONER AND lncome Tax OfficerWard 1 1(1). Hyderabad, Siqnature Towers. Sv.No.6lp) ofKondapur,Sy No3Z(pr of Kothaguda, 6pp. Botaniiai ' Cuil"ni?erlingarnpally, [Ranga ][Reddy, Hyderabad, ][Telangana_500084.]2The Principal Commissioner oi. lncome f ax 1 2, Hyderabad, SignatureTowers, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Kondapur, Hyderabad-S00084.3The Assessment Unit, lncome Tai Deiartment, National Faceless?erlingarnpally, [Ranga ][Reddy, Hyderabad, ][Telangana_500084.]2The Principal Commissioner oi. lncome f ax 1 2, Hyderabad, SignatureTowers, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Kondapur, Hyderabad-S00084.3The Assessment Unit, lncome Tai Deiartment, National FacelessAssessment.Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1, 2nd F6o;,-E_Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. [-Delhi-1 ]10003.Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. [-Delhi-1 ]10003. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus, declaring the notice u/s [.148 ]dt. [.19.03.2023 ]vide DIN No.lrBA/AST/s/148_112022- 23l10s0959872('1 ) issued by the JA0(1st respondent)instead of FAo(3rd respondent) for A.y. 2o1g-20, as void, illegal, and contrary tothe provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the principles of Natural Justicewrit of Mandamus, declaring the notice u/s [.148 ]dt. [.19.03.2023 ]vide DIN No.lrBA/AST/s/148_112022- 23l10s0959872('1 ) issued by the JA0(1st respondent)instead of FAo(3rd respondent) for A.y. 2o1g-20, as void, illegal, and contrary tothe provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the principles of Natural Justice lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased tostay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice u/s 148 dt. .1g.03. 2023 videDIN No. lrBA/AST/si 148-1t2022-23t1o50959872(1) issued by the JAo(1 strespondent) instead of FA0(3rd respondent) for A.y. 2O1g_2Oin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased tostay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice u/s 148 dt. .1g.03. 2023 videDIN No. lrBA/AST/si 148-1t2022-23t1o50959872(1) issued by the JAo(1 strespondent) instead of FA0(3rd respondent) for A.y. 2O1g_2O Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. J. SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPT) W.P.No: 20764 OF 2024 Betwee n: RenukaOrsu, Vy'/o ONarsimha, Aged about 45 years, Occupation- Business.PIot No.23 S-2, Aditya Nagar, Fragathinagar'Roid, Neai Srintvasa SteeiTraCers,'Kukatpatty, Hyderabid - 500672. .,,PETITIONERAND Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. J. SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPT) W.P.No: 20764 OF 2024 Betwee n: RenukaOrsu, Vy'/o ONarsimha, Aged about 45 years, Occupation- Business.PIot No.23 S-2, Aditya Nagar, Fragathinagar'Roid, Neai Srintvasa SteeiTraCers,'Kukatpatty, Hyderabid - 500672. .,,PETITIONERAND lncome Tax Off icer, Wardll(1). Hyderabad, Slqnature Towers. Sv No 6rpt nf5enr19ampariy Kondapur.Sy No_:Zf Rang_a [pt ]Reddy, _ of Hyderabad, K5thaguda. Telangana_5000g4.["Opp. ][- ]eoir"iirj ' Er;J";:5enr19ampariy Kondapur.Sy No_:Zf Rang_a [pt ]Reddy, _ of Hyderabad, K5thaguda. Telangana_5000g4.["Opp. ][- ]eoir"iirj ' Er;J";:2rne Hrrncrpar unret uommissioner of lncome Tax Ap and rs. 1oth Floo,, c_Block, I T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, HyOerania-SOOOO+.Block, I T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, HyOerania-SOOOO+.3lh" [Assessment ][U_ni! lncome ][Tax ][' ][Department, ][National ]Facelesslh" [Assessment ][U_ni! lncome ][Tax ][' ][Department, ][National ]FacelessA:sj,ssTen!,Centre. [Delhi, ][Ministry_of. ][Finance, Room ][No. ][4O1 ], [2nd ][rtoor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi_1 10003....RESPONDENTSRamp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi_1 10003....RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 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, order or direction, more particurarry one in the nature ofwrit of Mandamus, decraring the Assessment order dt. 21 .o2.2o24 passed bywrit of Mandamus, decraring the Assessment order dt. 21 .o2.2o24 passed bythe 3'd respondent u/s 147 r.w.s 144t1448 of ttre lncome-tax Act for A.y. 2016-11vide DIN No. |rBA/AST tst14rt2o23-24li 061251056(i ), consequent to the ordervide DIN No. |rBA/AST tst14rt2o23-24li 061251056(i ), consequent to the orderpassed u/s 148 dt. 23.o3.2023 vide DIN No. lrBA/AST/s/148_1r2o22-2311 051 208381( 1 ), issued by the JAo(1't respondent) instead of FAo(3drespondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act andrespondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act andcontrary to the Princ,ples of Natural Justice I lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased tostay all further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment order dt. 21lozt2o24passed by the 3rdrespondent u/s 141 r.w.s 144t1448 of the lncome-tax Act forA.Y. 2016-17 vide DIN No. |TBA/AST/ Stj47t2o23-24l1061251056(1 ) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. J. SUNITHA(JUN|OR SC FOR TNCOME TAX DEPT)(JUN|OR SC FOR TNCOME TAX DEPT) The Court made the following: cOMMON ORDER -7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION NOS.2O66420728 AND 20764 0F 20.24 COMMON ORDER (per Hon'bLe SP,J) Sri Dundu Sashank Manmohal, learned counselappears for the petitioners and Ms. J. Sunitha, learned JuniorStanding Counsel for Income Tax Department. appears for therespondents. 2. Regard being had to the similarity of the questioninvolved,on the joint request of the parties, the matters areanalogously heard and decided by this common order. 3. It is common ground taken by the learned counsel forthe petitioner(s) that in furtherance of Finance Act, 2021, re-assessment process stood modified but the respondents have nottaken care of it and therefore notices issued under Section l4Bof the Income Tax Act, 1961 calnot sustain judicial scrutinySince notices are bad in law, the consequential orders are alsobad in law. 4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for theparties agreed that curtains on this issue are linally drarvn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.259O3 of 2O22and other connected matters, decided by common order dated 14 .O9 .2023. The parties agreed that this matter may be disposedof in terms of the Common Order dated 14.O9.20'23. 3. It is common ground taken by the learned counsel forthe petitioner(s) that in furtherance of Finance Act, 2021, re-assessment process stood modified but the respondents have nottaken care of it and therefore notices issued under Section l4Bof the Income Tax Act, 1961 calnot sustain judicial scrutinySince notices are bad in law, the consequential orders are alsobad in law. 4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for theparties agreed that curtains on this issue are linally drarvn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.259O3 of 2O22and other connected matters, decided by common order dated 14 .O9 .2023. The parties agreed that this matter may be disposedof in terms of the Common Order dated 14.O9.20'23. 5This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022, held as under: "35. ln view of the aforesaid discussions, it is by now very clear thatthe procedure to be followed by the respondent-Department upontreating the notices issued for reassessment being under Section148A, the subsequent proceedings was mandatorily required to beundertaken under the substituted provisions as laid down under theFinance Act, 2021. In the absence of which, we are constrained to holdthat the procedure adopted by the respondent-Department is incontravention to the statute i.e. the Finance Act,202,1, at the firstinstance. Secondly, it is also in direct contravention to the directivesissued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal,supra. 36. For all the aioresaid reasons, the impugned notices issued and theproceedings drawn by the respondent-Oepartment is neither tenable,nor sustainable. The notices so issued and the procedure adoptedbeing per se illegal, deserves to be and are accordingly setaside/quashed- As a consequence, all the impugned orders gettingnor sustainable. The notices so issued and the procedure adoptedbeing per se illegal, deserves to be and are accordingly setaside/quashed- As a consequence, all the impugned orders gettingquashed, the consequential orders passed by the respondentDepartment pursuant to the notices issued under Section [.t47 ]and i48would also get quashed and it is ordered accordingly. The reason weDepartment pursuant to the notices issued under Section [.t47 ]and i48would also get quashed and it is ordered accordingly. The reason weare quashing the consequential order is on the principles that whenthe initiation of the proceedings itself was procedurally wrong, thesubsequent orders also gets nullified automatically.37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained andall these writ petitions stands allowed on this very iurisdictional issue.subsequent orders also gets nullified automatically.37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained andall these writ petitions stands allowed on this very iurisdictional issue.Since the impugned notaces and orders are gefting quashed on thepoint of jurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decidethe other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to beraised and contended in an appropriate proceedinqs.38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashishthe other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to beraised and contended in an appropriate proceedinqs.38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of AshishAgarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powers underAnic|e '142 of the Constitution of lndia, permitted the Revenue toproceed under the substituted provisions, and this Court allowing theAnic|e '142 of the Constitution of lndia, permitted the Revenue toproceed under the substituted provisions, and this Court allowing thepetitions only on the procedural flaw, the right conferred on the-Rev-enue [would ][remain ][reserved ][to ][proceed ][further ][if ]they so [want]-Rev-enue [would ][remain ][reserved ][to ][proceed ][further ][if ]they so [want] / from the stage of the order of the Supreme [Court in ][the case of ][Ashish]Agarwal, supra.39, No order as to costs." 6. / from the stage of the order of the Supreme [Court in ][the case of ][Ashish]Agarwal, supra.39, No order as to costs." 6. 6. In view of the consensus arrived, the impugrred ShowCause notices and consequential orders [passed ]in this batch [ol]writ petitions are set aside. Liberty is reserved [to ][both the parties]to take respective stand and to [proceed ]in [accordance ][with ][law]as per paragraph No.3B of the order [dated ][14.09.2A23 in]W.P.No.259O3 of 2022. 7. The Writ Petitions are allor,.'ed. No costs. [Interlocutory]applications, if any [pending, ]shall [also ]stald [ciosed.] HIGH COURT DATED:0210812024 f:. ['i].l17 |,IT 20?4('lo4,/\,'/\t\,/ COMMON ORDER WP.No's.20664, 20728 AND 20764 of 2024 ALLOWING ALL THE WRITPETITIONSWITHOUT COSTS @,,'\"1\"1b+- \\