Wp/21733/2025 Of Sri Veerender Reddy Kura v. The Income Tax Officer

I .34771 o' Hrc [c ][ou ][Rr ][*iJS=" ]:l6lE,3I [[l5h3ll;ffi ]] [[ou ][Rr ][*iJS=" ]][[Rr ][*iJS=" ]][[*iJS=" ]]:l6lE,3I [[l5h3ll;ffi ]]M [o ] m: +il'" Hf i[I.,i"$E'3#'"#' [*]:l6lE,3I [[l5h3ll;ffi ]]M [o ] m: +il'" Hf i[I.,i"$E'3#'"#' [*] PRESENT CHIEF THE ANDSTICE [P.SAM KOSHY]THE d2[[18]][[{50]][ [025]][[025]]NO:37829oF2[o22][ 2][173][3an]WR [lTl] d2[[18]][[{50]][ [025]][[025]] No.[37829][ oF2][o22] w.P. Pvt. [Ltd ][- ][Sultan Bazar ][Hyderabad ][' Rep ][by its ][Director] Between: [[ffin:[l"Jo"'"' ...PETITIONER Rep. [by its Secretary Finance Department' North Block' New]1Union [of lndia']DelhiAndhra [Pradesh ][and ][Telangana]DelhiAndhra [Pradesh ][and ][Telangana][[lncome-tax']] AND commissioner [or ][[lncome-tax']]' [gflg:alr::ier ][[Hyderabad']][[Hyderabad']] a. tn"om"-tax [Officer' ][Ward-2(1)' ][[Hyderabad']] ...RESPONDENTS Petition [[under Article 226 ][of the ][Constitution ]][[of the ][Constitution ]][[Constitution ]][of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the][[therewith' ][the ][High ][Court ]][[the ][High ][Court ]][[High ][Court ]][[Court ]][[may ][be]][[be]] Petition [[under Article 226 ][of the ][Constitution ]][[of the ][Constitution ]][[Constitution ]]filed [[therewith' ][the ][High ][Court ]][[the ][High ][Court ]][[High ][Court ]][[Court ]][[may ][be]][[be]]circumstances [stated ][in ]'i""n'O"tt ::Tr"J::':"L:;': [j::Tll";:"::$:ii:1T::$;',^:!:ilj:j:i]"i^uJi *,,u,r,ror, assessment [year ][2013-14 ][bearing ][,'* ],,r.^i;', 2311044229544(1) [and ][tne ][notice ][on the petitioner ][u/s ][148 ][daled ][281712022]AACCH9792H 'reopening [the ][assessment ][as]asst. [year ][2013-140"".1"n' ]'O*o and [contrary ][to ][tne ][statutory provisions ][and]illegal, [arbitrarr' ]''* 'nt'ooon]o'"'n consequently decrare that the reopening of the assessment on the petitioner forasst. year 2013-14 rs bad and unenforceableasst. year 2013-14 rs bad and unenforceable lA NO: 't OF 2022 Petition under section 'r51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to staythe proceedings u/s.148A(d) dated 2Br7 r2o22 for asst. year 2013-14 bearing DrNNo.lrBA/colVr/Fr17r2o22-23ri044229s44(1) and arso the notice u/s 148 dated281712022 for asst year 2013-14 bearing pANo. AACCHgTg2H on the petitionerand be pleased to stay all other consequential proceedings. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Between 1Principal Chief Commrssioner of lncome_tax, Andhra pradesh and TelanganaState. Hyderabad.Principal Chief Commrssioner of lncome_tax, Andhra pradesh and TelanganaState. Hyderabad. ...VACATE PETITIoNER/RESPoNDENT No.22. lncome{ax Off icer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad. ...VACATE PETTTTONER/RESpONDENT No.3AND 1Hyperron Enterprises 'pvt t_td., Sultan Bazar Hyderabad, Repby rts DirectorDeepa Bhattad Deepa Bhattad ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2lndia, Rep. by its Secretary Finance Department, North Btock, New #iflll " #iflll " ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS Petition under section 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated rnthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased tovacate lnterim Order granted on 10 10.2022 in W.p No. 37 B2g/2O22. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI y.RATNAKAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : Ms.J.SUNITHA, SC for IT DEPT counserror the Respondent No.3 , Tr"a"i$rlr$fllfftdr. couNSEL) t I W.P.No.217330F2o25 -"*',};;*;::,t?:xt'lilF'il,::'?,il:ix,-'*.'Y:*i Be Ward [- ][10(1), ][lT ][Towers' ][A C. ][Guards' ][Masabtank'] AND lF:i:8S" [ir,3Ji*'] ...RESPONDENTS Petition [[under Article ]][[226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ]][[of ][the ][Constitution ]][[the ][Constitution ]][[Constitution ]][of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the][[the ][High Court may ][be]][[High Court may ][be]][[be]] Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI y.RATNAKAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : Ms.J.SUNITHA, SC for IT DEPT counserror the Respondent No.3 , Tr"a"i$rlr$fllfftdr. couNSEL) t I W.P.No.217330F2o25 -"*',};;*;::,t?:xt'lilF'il,::'?,il:ix,-'*.'Y:*i Be Ward [- ][10(1), ][lT ][Towers' ][A C. ][Guards' ][Masabtank'] AND lF:i:8S" [ir,3Ji*'] ...RESPONDENTS Petition [[under Article ]][[226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ]][[of ][the ][Constitution ]][[the ][Constitution ]][[Constitution ]][of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the][[the ][High Court may ][be]][[High Court may ][be]][[be]] Petition [[under Article ]][[226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ]][[of ][the ][Constitution ]][[the ][Constitution ]][[Constitution ]]filed [therewith' ][[the ][High Court may ][be]][[High Court may ][be]][[be]]circumstances [stated ][in ][;" ;;';*- ]pleased [to ][pass ]'n [o'd"' o' ][direction' ][especially ][one ][in the ][nature of WRIT ] TVIANDAMUS [holding that ][the ][order passed by Respondent u/s ][14BA(3) of ][the ][Act']dt23-06 [2?25with ] '"0'*"'O" [*" ] [48A12025- 2611077497323(1)]OU'OlU [t"ued ][under ][section ][148 of ][the ][Act ][wlth ] [and]and [the ][notice ][dated ]" -arUitrary Notice [No ][lrBo'o"'''1otl ][tl':2o'u]26't0"4g7474(1) ][for the ][assessment ][year]and [passed ][in ][gross violation ][of ][principles of]2O2O-21, [as being ][ittegar' ]natural [justice without application of mind' ][and ][consequently set aside ][the ][same'] IANO:1OF2025025 IANO:1OF2025025hatin the [circumstances stated ][in]Petition [under Section 151 CPC ][praying ][t]Court [may ][be ][Pleased ][Pleased]ighthe affidavit [filed ][in ][support ][of ][the petition' the ][H]bythe [ResPondent u/s 148 ][of ][the]to suspend [the ][operation ][of ][the ][notice ][issued]ear2O2O-21 [with ] [Notice]O", [dt 23 06 ][2025 ][for ][the ][assessment ][y]and all [consequential ][Proceedings]*o ,ruo,o"t' [sI14a ][1t2O25- ][26t1077497474(1\]thereto.Counsel [for the Petitioner ][: ] [A'V'RAGHU ] Sr.SC [for ][lT DEPT]Counsel [for the Respondents: ][Ms'B'SAPNA ][REDDY'] W.P.No.218't 5 0F 2025 Between: Excellent rnsurance Broking servrces Ltd. A company incorporated under thecomp-anies'Act 1955.^Having its negiiiereo onii" ano ptate orousness !i1 '8-2-269rLMr301 and 302, lrlrd Froor iumn-rni n,lirr noao No.-2., sanJaiJi,ir.Mr. Hyderabad Atmakur [_ ]tvladh 500034 u sud 1 etangana. ano hani Raonepieseni;A by,t, j;ih"?ta' ldil;i,Mr. Hyderabad Atmakur [_ ]tvladh 500034 u sud 1 etangana. ano hani Raonepieseni;A by,t, j;ih"?ta' ldil;i, ...PETITIONERAND1union of lndia lr,4inrstry of Finance, rncome Tax Department, New Derhi - 1000111union of lndia lr,4inrstry of Finance, rncome Tax Department, New Derhi - 100011 2The Office of Commissionel l.19oqr9_T-ax Department, Ministry of Finance,l.19oqr9_T-ax Department, Ministry of Finance, office of the lncome Tax officel circleg('r), Hyderabad signature Towers, svNo. 6(P) of Kondapur Sy No 37(p) orXcitnagJoi, b;; B"i;;i";iG;;;;n; [",]Serilingampatty (M) RR Drstrict AVO"rrOrO, itfrng-al-;;, SOOOaa emait_hyderabad. dcit8. 1 @ incometa x gov in phone- OqO:ilhiiioNo. 6(P) of Kondapur Sy No 37(p) orXcitnagJoi, b;; B"i;;i";iG;;;;n; [",]Serilingampatty (M) RR Drstrict AVO"rrOrO, itfrng-al-;;, SOOOaa emait_hyderabad. dcit8. 1 @ incometa x gov in phone- OqO:ilhiiio 4The National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministryof Finance, Government of lndia, New Delhi - f OO Of f-of Finance, Government of lndia, New Delhi - f OO Of f- ...RESPONDENTS 2The Office of Commissionel l.19oqr9_T-ax Department, Ministry of Finance,l.19oqr9_T-ax Department, Ministry of Finance, office of the lncome Tax officel circleg('r), Hyderabad signature Towers, svNo. 6(P) of Kondapur Sy No 37(p) orXcitnagJoi, b;; B"i;;i";iG;;;;n; [",]Serilingampatty (M) RR Drstrict AVO"rrOrO, itfrng-al-;;, SOOOaa emait_hyderabad. dcit8. 1 @ incometa x gov in phone- OqO:ilhiiioNo. 6(P) of Kondapur Sy No 37(p) orXcitnagJoi, b;; B"i;;i";iG;;;;n; [",]Serilingampatty (M) RR Drstrict AVO"rrOrO, itfrng-al-;;, SOOOaa emait_hyderabad. dcit8. 1 @ incometa x gov in phone- OqO:ilhiiio 4The National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministryof Finance, Government of lndia, New Delhi - f OO Of f-of Finance, Government of lndia, New Delhi - f OO Of f- ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Artrcre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue a writ or direction or order more particularly in the nature of a writof certiorari calling for the records and quashing the (i) lmpugned order bearrngDIN and Notice No |rBA/AST/F/148At2025-26t10777sg464(1) dated 25 06 202sfor the AY 2020 - 2021 rssued by the Respondent No. 3 under section r4gA(3) ofthe lncome Tax Act, 196'l , and (ii) lmpugned Notice bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1 12025-26t1077763814(1)dated 25.06.2025for the Ay zo2o -202 1 issued by theRespondent No 3 under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act,196'l as being illegal and in violation of applicable law and consequently set-asideall consequent/subsequent notices/orde rs/pen alties and further restrain theRespondents from making any assessment, reassessment or re-computation orotherwise proceeding against the Petitioner on the basis of the aforementionedlmpugned Order and Notice dated 25.06.2025. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petitron, the High Court may be pleased pleasedto suspend all further proceedings pursuant to (i) lmpugned Order bearing DIN &the affidavit filed in support of the petitron, the High Court may be pleased pleasedto suspend all further proceedings pursuant to (i) lmpugned Order bearing DIN & ff dated [25 06 ][2025 ][for ][the]Notice [No ] [8A12025-2611077759464(1\ ]t ffAY [2o2o ]- [2o21'"u'a ][oltn'o"'oono"nt ] -'::"j,:;"::ltl'i:1]':t rncome [rax ][Act. ]['1e61, ][and ][(ii) ][lmpusned ][t"'"".::i;;', ]["".',* ][ot ][zozo ]-dated [25 ][062025 ][for the AY ][2020]tTBAJAsT/s/14 [u-t''2o,2u'Jito)77utu''ottl ]2021 [issued by theRespon'dent ][No ][3 ][under Section 148 ][of ][the ][lncome Tax ][Act']notices/orders/penalties'1 961 [including ]"tt "ont"qu"nUsubsequent IA NO: NO:[[10F][ 2025]][[ 2025]] IA NO: NO:[[10F][ 2025]][[ 2025]]at in [the ][circumstances stated ][in]Petltlon[under Section ][1 ][51 CPC ][PraYing ][th]h Court [may ][be ][Pleased ][Pleased]the [affidavit ][filed ][in ][suP][port ][of ][the Petition' the ][Hig]lmpugned [Order bearing DIN ][&]to disPense [with ][the ][fil][ing of ][certified ][coPies ][of ][(i)]I 1 48 [Al ][2025 -26 ] [1 ][o7 ][7 ][7 ][59 ][4][64(1][ ) ][dated ][25 06 ][2025 ][for ][the]Notice [No ] der [Sectiorr 148A(3) ][of ][the]2021 [issued][ by ][theRespondent ][No ][3 ][un]AY [2020]bearing [& ][Notice ][No]lncome [Tax ][Act' ][1961 ]['][ and ][(ii) ][lmPugned ][Notice]5.06.2025for [the ] [2020]ITBA/AsT/S/1 [4 ][8 -112025][ -26t 10777 ][63814(1) ][dated ][2]148 [of lncome ][Tax ][Act' ][1961]2021 [issued ][bY ][the ][ResP][ondent ][No ][3 ][under Section] IA NO:[[20] [25]][ [25]][[25]] IA NO:[[20] [25]][ [25]][[25]] IA NO:[[20] [25]][ [25]][[25]]t in [the circumstances stated ][in]Petition [u][nder Section ][1 ][51 CPC ][PraYing ][tha]Court [may be ][Pleased ][Pleased]the [affidavit filed][ in ][suPPort ][of ][the ][Petition' ][the ][High]bearing [& ][Notice ][Nc]to stay [the ][oP][eration ][of(i) ][lmPugned ][Order]25.062025 [for the ] [2020]12025-261 [07 ][77 ][59464( ][1 ][) ][dated]ITBA/AST/F/148Action [14BA(3) ][of ][the ][lncome ][Tax]202'1 [issued ][bY th][eRespondent ][No ][3 ][under ][Se]DIN [& ][Notice ][No.]lmpugned [Notice ][beartng-]Act, [1961 ]' [and ][(]2O25fot [the AY ][2020]ITBA/AST/S/ [1 ][4 ] [_1 ] [ 5-26t1O77763814(1) ][dated ][25 ][06]8 of [the ][lncome ][Tax ][Act']2021 [issued ][bY ][the ][ResP][ondent ][No ][3 ][under Section ][14]1961 [including ][all consequ][ ent/subsequent ][notices/orders/ penalties] Counsel [for the Petitioner ][: SRI SHEETAL ] couNSEL)counser [ror ][the ][Respondent No'1 ][' ]Ti;";S'itJlflXtlt'd", Counsel [for the Respondents ][No'2to4 : Ms'J'SUNITHA' ] [for ][lT ] The [Court ][made ][the ][following:][ COMMON ORDER] HN'JUSTICE SRI APARESHKUMAR SINGHAND THE HON'B LE SRI JUSTI EP.SAM KOSHY WRITPETITION Nos. 3coMMON ORDER: 7a29 of 2O2a.o 1733 aad 2L 815 ot 2025 Learned counsel Sri y.RatnakarSri y.Ratnakary.Ratnakar Learned counsel Sri y.RatnakarSri y.Ratnakary.Ratnakarappears for thepetitioner in W.p.No.3ZB29 of 2022.Learned counselSri A.V.Raghu Ramappears for the petitioner1nW.P.No.2 t 733 of2025. Learned counsejSri Sheetal Srikanthappears for the petitioner inW.P.No.2t815 of 2025. Ms. J.Sunitha, learned Senior Stalding Counsel, appears for Income Ta_r Department in W.p.Nos.37g29 of2022 and 21815 of 2025. Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy,learned Senior Standing 2022 and 21815 of 2025. Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy,learned Senior Standing Counsel, appears lor Income TaxDepartment in W.p.No.2 lZ33 ol 2025. Ms. B.Kavitha yadav, learned Central Government counsel, appears for respondent No.l in W.p.No. 3T829 of2022 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representingSri Gadi Praveen Kumar, iear-ned Deputy Soiicitor GeneralW.p.No. 3T829 of2022 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representingSri Gadi Praveen Kumar, iear-ned Deputy Soiicitor General @ s of Inclia, [appears ][for ][resPondent][ No.1 ][in ][W.P.No'21815 ][of]2025 Regard [being ][had to the ][similitude of ][the ][Questious] 2Regard involved [in ][these ][writ ][petitions' ][the ][matters ][were]analogouslY [heard'] 3. In thesewrit Petitions, [the]challenge [is ][either ][to]Section [14BA ][of ][the]notices [r'vhich]were issue [d ][under]tnlo-. [Tax ][Act, ][196 ][1 ][(hereinafter referred ][to as' ]["the ][Act")']or to [the ][assessment orders ][which ][have been ][passed ][under]Section [147 ][of ][the ][Act'] 4. Learned [counsel ][for the parties' ][during the ][course ][of]hearing, [fairly ][submit that the ][issue involved ][in ][these ][writ]petitions [was ][considered ][by ][a Division Bench of ][this ][Court]in W.P.No.2 [6304 ][of ][2024' ][uide ][order ][dated ][28'04'2025']and the [said ][order ][squarelY][ covers ][the ][Present ][wrlt]petitions [as ][well] 5. The relevant [extract ][of ][the ][order ][d'ated ][2B'O4 ]['2025]lpassed in [W.P.No.263O ][4 of ][2024 reads ][as ][under:],\ 3. In thesewrit Petitions, [the]challenge [is ][either ][to]Section [14BA ][of ][the]notices [r'vhich]were issue [d ][under]tnlo-. [Tax ][Act, ][196 ][1 ][(hereinafter referred ][to as' ]["the ][Act")']or to [the ][assessment orders ][which ][have been ][passed ][under]Section [147 ][of ][the ][Act'] 4. Learned [counsel ][for the parties' ][during the ][course ][of]hearing, [fairly ][submit that the ][issue involved ][in ][these ][writ]petitions [was ][considered ][by ][a Division Bench of ][this ][Court]in W.P.No.2 [6304 ][of ][2024' ][uide ][order ][dated ][28'04'2025']and the [said ][order ][squarelY][ covers ][the ][Present ][wrlt]petitions [as ][well] 5. The relevant [extract ][of ][the ][order ][d'ated ][2B'O4 ]['2025]lpassed in [W.P.No.263O ][4 of ][2024 reads ][as ][under:],\ '15. What is worrying this Bench more is the fact.ithat an endeavour is being made whole heartedly toensLrre not to generate lurther litigation on issueswhich have been laid to rest by alarge nbtite. orHigh Courts all of whom have taker1,:5,6onsistentstand that the actlon of the [ncome .I.ax Departmentbeing violative ofthe Finance Act,2O2O andFinarrce Act, 2O2lNolr., in order toprotect theinterest of the Revenue as also that of the assessee,it would be trite at this juncture, if we dispose ofthe vvrit petition with an observation/direction thatthe disposal of the instant u,rit petition in terms ofthe judgment rendered by this High Court in thecase of Kankanalq. Rauindra Reddg a. Income_Tqx OfJicer 12023) 156 taxmann.com ITB(Telangana)] shafl howevcr be subject to theoutcome of the SLps u,hich u.ere liled by the [ncomeTax Department and u,hich is pendingconsideration before the Hon,ble S upreme Court.76. In the given facts and circumstances, thisBench is of the considered opinion that unless anduntil u.e do not timely dispose of matters which aresquarely covered by the decision of this Court andwhich stands fortified by the decisions of thevarious other High Courts on thc vcry same issue,the per-rdency of this High Court u.ould further beburdened q,hich otherwise can be decidecl anddisposcd of as a covered matter. q far as the as the the [[interest ][of thc ][Revenue ][ls]][[of thc ][Revenue ][ls]][[Revenue ][ls]][[ls]] 77. Sofar as the as the the [[interest ][of thc ][Revenue ][ls]][[of thc ][Revenue ][ls]][[Revenue ][ls]][[ls]]concerned, we arc [of ][the ][considered ][opinion ][that]the interest [of the ][Revenue ][has ][already ][been]considered [and ][protected, ][as ][has ][been observed tn]paragraphs [36. 37 and ][38 ][of the ][ordcr ][which' ][for]ready referencc, [is ][rcproduccd ][hereuuder:] 36. For all the [aforesaid reasorrs' ][the]Lornn.a [ltoliccs issucd ][and ][the]o.J."-"ai"*. [drawn ][by ][the ][respondent-]b"prrt-"n, [is ][ncither tenable ][nor]The notices [so ][issued and ][the]".,Ja-""bf.. ;;;;i"..' adoprcd [being ][per s9 ][i.llesal,]a"."ru." to [bc ][and are ][accordingly ][set]aside/quashed. [As ][a ][consequence' ][all ][the]ordcrs [gctting ][quashed' ][fre]tr";;il;J .oi".tr"",i"f ordeis Passed [bY ][thc].""po,-,d",-tt- [D,'pa ][rl ][mcnt ][pursuant ][to ][the]issued undcr Section-iii-^.a ;.J;" 148 would [also ][get ][quashed and ][it-]is ordercd [accordingly ][The ][reason rve ][are];;;;;.* thc consequential [order ][is on ][the]Jri""f [pf"t ][that ][when ][thc ][iniiialion ][of ][the]nroceedines [itself ][was ][procedurally ][wrong']il;'";;",';,,,..1 [orders also gets nullified]automaticrallY' 3?."' ia,, [p-reliminary'' ][objection ][raised ][by]the nclitrr)ncr [ts ][sustained ][and ][aU ][these]r-ir ['p.ririon. ][311nds ][i[erved ][on ][this ][very]issue since [the ][impugned]t"r*i.li."rl '.rotl""" and orders are getting quashed onit. poi"t [of ][jurisdiction; ][we ar9 ]loti;;r"'J [to ][procled further ][ald ][decide the];;;;'; i""t.s [raised ][bv ][the ][petitioner whicn]slands [reservcd ][lo ]-he [ralsed ][aro]contended [in ][an ][appropriatc ][proceedin-gs']aA. Since the [Hon'ble Supreme Court]had, in thc [case ][ofAshish ][Agarwal ]' [supra']as a one time [measure exercising ][the]therrowers unclcr [Article 142 of ]E.,.rstlrurion of [India. ][permilted ][the]n"r"rr]-," lo [proccecl ][under ][the ][subslituted]Lnd [this ][Court ][allowing ][the]provisions, ietitio.r" [only ][ou the ][procedural ][flzrw' the]iilr.t .o,-tt".i"d [on the ][Revenue ][would] I \ ;", #'" [t'#.' ]["*:*. ]";1n: [:,i;'ili;l]AgarwaJ, ol Ashishsupra-- [" ilrc ][case ]19. We wouldfurther obse.ations like to make,r_ru, "r.o"'' rhe insrant *.,, ;,;;r:;ilH: the earlier ;..;::ffiriKankanara order of IHigh court in the case ofaorrri. o orJi c e r K2 o 2 3), r.,1;.:; -, r n c.o m e. r qx!!*,," " is " [ltctangana)J]subjected to ch belore the Hon'blesupreme Court in art"t'*t No 3574 of 2024' by the Income preferredTax Dt that alowing o, ,h" ,n'ot nt '^r, writ [, ]petition [wt: ][r,akc ]is [it ][crear]to outcome of the aJ subjectRevenue SLP. preferred bv theagainst dr. o,ll,".1l of this the case of High court in*or,oor=t'"ton ,,:".o ro* ^o ;;;;; (Telangana) "fir; :;'I:^,: ::: r r";j. This, in ot."X) *oto"' rvould either of the parties, ,r,ntt mean thatappropriate "o [u'a,t' ][may ][move ]anpetition petitr'on in ""tn"' revi'al of this writthe right or,tu'tt supreme court in ,n. ['nt ][decision ][of ][the ][Hon'ble]Pending SI-P on the same issue- very L9 . ofjurisdiction ariowed Accordingly, in favour of the ,h. it"t writ so far petition as the s[andsissuer, "o.raaaou"""ssee As a consequence, theimpugned r4g-A and notice underLed' challenge under sectionsr4g stands set aside/quashed. The consequential [orders, ][if any' also stand ][seL]aside/quashed [in ][similar ][terms ][as ][have ][been]passed by [this High Court in the ][case ][of]Ka.ttkanala [Rauindra ][ReddA ][u' ][Incotne-Tax]Offtcer [(2023) [156 ][taxmann ][com ][178 ][(Tclangana)l']Therc shall [be no ][order ][as ][to ][cosLs'] Consequently, [misccllaneous ][petitions]pending, [if ][anY, ][shall stand ][closed'"] In view [[of the ][consensus ]][[consensus ]][[arrived ][at' ]][[at' ]][these ][writ] 6. In view [[of the ][consensus ]][[consensus ]][[arrived ][at' ]][[at' ]]petitions are [also disposed ][of ][in ][terms ][of ][the ][order ][dated]2a.O4.2O25 [passed ][in ][W'P'No'26304 ][of ][2024' ][However']there [shall ][be no ][order ][as ][to costs'] Miscellarreousapplicationspending,ifany,shall stand [closed.] D/.P. [P][citttla ][rRtsuua]STANT /,TRUE SEGTION To,1The Secretary [Finance Department' Union ][of ][lndia' ][North Block' ][New]Delhi.1The Secretary [Finance Department' Union ][of ][lndia' ][North Block' ][New]Delhi. 1Delhi.Delhi.2The Principal [Chief ][Commissioner ][of ][Incometax' ][Andhra Pradesh ][and]i"irng"ni' [strte, ][HYderabad]i"irng"ni' [strte, ][HYderabad] The lncome-tax [Officer, ][Ward-2('l)' ][[Hyderabad']] [[Hyderabad']]- 10(1)' rr [rowers' ][Ac ][Guards']- 10(1)' rr [rowers' ][Ac ][Guards'] 4.!il:",,Xini.ilx},3[l"it##d Ministry [or ][Finance']!il:",,Xini.ilx},3[l"it##d Ministry [or ][Finance']5.'E:?"..:roil':?'i"t?i,^ffi"8,,":n, [Iito ][???'n'ent' ]E:?"..:roil':?'i"t?i,^ffi"8,,":n, [Iito ][???'n'ent' ]6lng$Ep;u*:*ti,l1:t1,#ffifu hydera-bad. [d ][cit8. ][1 ][@ ][i ][ncome][iA;*13tki"A#']lng$Ep;u*:*ti,l1:t1,#ffifu hydera-bad. [d ][cit8. ][1 ][@ ][i ][ncome][iA;*13tki"A#'] a ' ilffi . ff :? ??1, i B:: B:i" A.;::? T,",*,8.il$ o,J,.# T io o, 81, Dep a rt m e n t 1Delhi.Delhi.2The Principal [Chief ][Commissioner ][of ][Incometax' ][Andhra Pradesh ][and]i"irng"ni' [strte, ][HYderabad]i"irng"ni' [strte, ][HYderabad] The lncome-tax [Officer, ][Ward-2('l)' ][[Hyderabad']] [[Hyderabad']]- 10(1)' rr [rowers' ][Ac ][Guards']- 10(1)' rr [rowers' ][Ac ][Guards'] 4.!il:",,Xini.ilx},3[l"it##d Ministry [or ][Finance']!il:",,Xini.ilx},3[l"it##d Ministry [or ][Finance']5.'E:?"..:roil':?'i"t?i,^ffi"8,,":n, [Iito ][???'n'ent' ]E:?"..:roil':?'i"t?i,^ffi"8,,":n, [Iito ][???'n'ent' ]6lng$Ep;u*:*ti,l1:t1,#ffifu hydera-bad. [d ][cit8. ][1 ][@ ][i ][ncome][iA;*13tki"A#']lng$Ep;u*:*ti,l1:t1,#ffifu hydera-bad. [d ][cit8. ][1 ][@ ][i ][ncome][iA;*13tki"A#'] a ' ilffi . ff :? ??1, i B:: B:i" A.;::? T,",*,8.il$ o,J,.# T io o, 81, Dep a rt m e n t B One CC to SRt SHEETAL SR|KANTH, Advocate. 9. One CC to SRt A.V.RAGHU RAM, Advocate. 9. One CC to SRt A.V.RAGHU RAM, Advocate. '10.One CC to SRt y.RATNAKAR, Advocate. CC to SRt y.RATNAKAR, Advocate. i 1. One CC to Ms.J.SUNITHA, SC for Income Tax Department IOPUC]IOPUC] IOPUC]" ,o&r3," [to ][Ms ][B.sAPNA ][REDDY, ][sc ][for ][rncome ][Tax ][Department.],o&r3," [to ][Ms ][B.sAPNA ][REDDY, ][sc ][for ][rncome ][Tax ][Department.] " 33tr33.rti#'rB,*"HA [(sc ][FoR ][.ENTRAL ]Gow 14 Two CD CopieJ the order, dated 2a'04-2025 in w p No 26304 or $!"1?"Yi1:,3.333,' " BSK BS '; spw HIGH COURT DATED:28 t07t2025 j:_:-.::\\(of.1\" :. [.S ][;4 ]rr'-:\{-(\ !1a:M(i22NB(i COMMON ORDER WP.No.37829 of 2022, 21733& 21815 0F 2025& 21815 0F 2025 DISPOSTNG OF THE WRIT PETITIONSWITHOUT COSTS 'LT)\q THE [P'SAM ] NARSING [RAo]rHE IroNou*'iH#3ffiT8 TTONN[o.26304][ OF][ 2024] PETI ORDER' [(per ][Hon'ble ][Sri ][Justice ][Narsing ][Rao ][Nmdikonda)] Heard [Mr'Thanneru ][Chaitanya ][Kumar' ][leanred counsel ][for]Standingthe [petitioner, ][Ms' ][B'Sapna ][Reddy' ][leamed ][Juntor]Counsel [for ][the ][Income ][Tax ][Depafiment][ ior ][the ][resPondents']Perused [the record'] This is is [[a ][writ ][petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[writ ][petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[where ][the ][proceedings ]][[the ][proceedings ]][[proceedings ]][are ][either] 2. This is is [[a ][writ ][petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[writ ][petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[petition ][where ][the ][proceedings ]][[where ][the ][proceedings ]][[the ][proceedings ]][[proceedings ]]challenged [to ][the notices ][which ][were ][issued ][under ][Section ][l48A]and [148 ][of ][the Income ][Tax ][Act' ][196t (for ][short ]['the ][Act') ][or ][the]assessment [orders those have been ][passed ][under ][Section ][147 ][of]the Act [which ][have been assailed'] This writ [[petition ]][[is being taken up today ][only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[on ][one ][of ][the]][[one ][of ][the]][[of ][the]][[the]] 3. This writ [[petition ]][[is being taken up today ][only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[on ][one ][of ][the]][[one ][of ][the]][[of ][the]][[the]]that [the ][notices ][issued ][under Section 148A ][of ][the ][Act]grounds, and the subsequent [initiation ][of ][proceedings under ][Section ][148 ][of]the Act by [the ][jurisdictional ][Assessing ][Officer' ][whereas ][in ][terms]of the amendment [that ][was ][brought to the ][Income ][Tax ][Act ][by way]of Finance [Lct, ][2021 ][w'e.f', ][0l'04'2021 ][onwards' ][proceedings] under Section I4gA oftAct as also under Section Act ought to have arso t reen issued 148 of theand proceeded in a facelessmanner. 3. This writ [[petition ]][[is being taken up today ][only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[only ][on ][one ][of ][the]][[on ][one ][of ][the]][[one ][of ][the]][[of ][the]][[the]]that [the ][notices ][issued ][under Section 148A ][of ][the ][Act]grounds, and the subsequent [initiation ][of ][proceedings under ][Section ][148 ][of]the Act by [the ][jurisdictional ][Assessing ][Officer' ][whereas ][in ][terms]of the amendment [that ][was ][brought to the ][Income ][Tax ][Act ][by way]of Finance [Lct, ][2021 ][w'e.f', ][0l'04'2021 ][onwards' ][proceedings] under Section I4gA oftAct as also under Section Act ought to have arso t reen issued 148 of theand proceeded in a facelessmanner. 4. The contention contention of the petitioner the petitioner petitioner is that the issue issue ofproceedings being in violation of the Financ e Act, 2021i.e., theimpugned notices under Section 14gA and section I4g of the Actnot being issued in a faceless manner, have already been dealt withand decided by this Court in the case of KANKANALARAVINDRA REDDY vs. TNCOME_TAX O}FICERT decidedon 14.09.2023 whereby a batch of writ petitions were allowed andthe proceedings initiated under Section l4gA as also under Section148 of the Act were held to be bad with consequential reliefs on theground of it being in violation of the provisions of Section l5lA ofthe Act read with Notificarion lg/2022 dated 29.03.2022. The saidjudgment passed by this Court has also been subsequently followedin a large number of writ petitions which were allowed on similarterms. The contention contention of the petitioner the petitioner petitioner is that the issue issue ofthat the issue issue of '(2023) [156 ][taxmann ][com ][178 ][(Telangana)l] Down the [[line, ][we hnd ][that ][the ][same ]][[we hnd ][that ][the ][same ]][[that ][the ][same ]][[the ][same ]][[same ]][[issue has also ]][[been]] 5. Down the [[line, ][we hnd ][that ][the ][same ]][[we hnd ][that ][the ][same ]][[that ][the ][same ]][[the ][same ]][[same ]][[issue has also ]][[been]]decided [against ][the ][Revenue ][by ][various ][High ][Cour-ts i'e ][']the [Bombay ][High ][Court ][in ][the ][case ][of ] by TECHNOLOGIES [LTD., ][VS. ] oFINCoMETAx&OTHERS2,GauhatiHighCourtinthecaseof RAM [SAH vs' ] [INDIA3' ][Punjab ][and]HaryataHigh [Court ][in ][the ][case ][of JATINDER SINGH ] vs. UNION [INDIA4, ][and Telangana ][High Court ][in the ][case ][of]SRI VENKATARAMANA [VS. ] COMMISSIONER [where ][the ][issue ][was ][in]respect [of ][international taxation' Bombay ][High ][Court ][in ][the ][case ][of]ABHTN [vs' INCOME ] [OFFICER']INTERNATIONAL [which ][is ][again ][on]intemational [taxation ][and central ][circle' High ][Court ][of ][Himachal]Pradesh [in ][the ][case ][of ] [vs' ] OFFICERT, [Gujarat ][High ][Court ][in ][the ][case ][of ] ' [yzoz+1 ][464 ] [430 ][(Bom)]'i1Ozi) [156 ][taxmann.com ][478 ][(Gauhati)l]^iizozql165 [taxmann.com ][115 ][(Punjab ][& ][Haryana)l]' 12024) [167 ][taxmann.com ][41 1 ][(Telangana)l]" 12024) [166 ][taxmann.com ][679 ][(Bombay)l]'iioiqi [165 ][ru*-u*."om ] [(Himachal ][Pradesh)l] DAIIYABHAT RADADIYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAIIYABHAT RADADIYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3X5)8, Jharkand High Court in the case of SHyAMSUNDAR SAW vs. UNION OF INDIAe, Ralasthan High Courtin rhe case of SHARDA DEVI CHHAJER vs. INCOME TAXOFFICER & ANOTHER and batch of writ petitionsro whichstood decided on 19.03.2024. Similar views have also been takenby the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court in the case ofGIRDHAR GOPAL DALMTA vs. UNION OI.INDIA & ORS(M.A.T 1690 of 2023),decided on25.09.2024.6. Even though the same issue having been decided by a largenumber of High Courts, we are still confronted with large filing ofidentical matters on daily basis ranging between 5 to 10 writpetitions. That upon the instructions being sought from theDepartment, they have been taking a solitary ground that thedecision of the Bombay High court in the case of HexawareTechnologies Ltd., (2 supra) as also the one which has beendecided by this Court in the case of Kanakala Ravindra Reddy '2024 Online Guj 4012'2025 SCC Online lhar 2g7Io 12023 [: ]RI- JD :49 8 4-DB l (1 supra) [has been ][subjected ][to ][challenge ][in ][a ][Special ][Leave]Petition [i.e., ] [No'3574 ][of ][2024 ][before ][the Hon'ble ][Supreme]Court [and ][the Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][is ][seized ][of ][the ][matter']In addition, [there are ][about ][1200 SLPs also ][filed ][arising out ][ofthe]same [issue ][being decided ][by ][various ][High ][Courts'] 7 . To a [query ][being put to ][the leamed counsel ][for ][the Revenue']they [have ][categorically ][accepted ][the ][fact ][that there ][is ][no ][interim]order [granted ][by ][the ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][in ][any ][of ][these]matters [pending ][before ][it' ][Meanwhile' fresh ][writ ][petitions ][o ][f]identical [nature ][are ][being piled ][up ][before this ][Bench ][on ][daily ][basis]and the [pendency ][is ][getting ][increased ][on ][matter ][which ][otherwise]has already [been ][dealt ][and decided ][by ][this ][very ][High ][courr ][itserf.]8. On the [one ][hand' ][even though ][the ][order ][of ][this Courl ][that]was [passed as ][early ][as ][on ][14'09'2023 and ][more ][16 months ][have]till [date, ][we ][do ][not find ][any remedial ][steps ][having ][been]lapsed, taken [by ][the ][Income ]['fax ][Department ][to ][take appropriate ][steps to]either [ho'ld ][back ][issuance ][of ][notice under Section ][148,\ ][and under]Section [148 ][of ][the ][Act by ][the ][jurisdictional ][Assessing ][Officer']rather the [authorities ][concerned ][in ][the teeth ][of ][series ][of ][decisions] by all the major High Courts in India are continuously stillrnitiating proceedings under Section148.4 of the Act and alsornrtrating proceedings under Section l4g of. the Act incontravention to the amendments brought into the Income Tax Actpursuant to the Finance Act,2020 as also the Finance Act202l.9' upon a query being pur as ro why can.r this writ petition bedisposed of in the teeth of the decision rendered by this Court inthe case of Kanakala Ravindra Reddy (l supra), Iearned StandingCounsel for the Income Tax Department contends that those wouldunnecessarily burden the Income Tax Department where theywould be required to file equar number of SLps before theHon'ble Supreme Court and it would be further burdening theexchequer of'the Union of India. It was also the contention of theleamed Standing counser that no prejudice would be caused to theinterest of the petitioners in case if this writ petition is kept pendingtill the finalization of the SLps pending before the Hon,bleSupreme Court and the fact that the petitioner is already enjoyingthe benefit of interim protection. Nonetheless, on the earlier queryof this Court as to why the Income Tax Department have not comeout with a mechanism to issue appropriate instructions or to take appropriate [steps ][in ][ensuring ][that ][proceedings ][under Section 148A]of the [Act ][as ][also ][the ][assessment ][orders ][under Section ][148 ][of ][the]Act are [kept ][in ][a ][hold ][in ][the ][light ][ofthe ][decisions dedcided ][by ][the]various [High ][Courts, ][it ][was ][submitted ][by ][the ][learned ][Standing]Counsel [that the ][said ][steps can ][only ][be taken ][at ][the ][level ][of ] as any [such ][steps ][would ][have ][to ][be taken Pan ][India ][and cannot ][be]limited [to ][any ][of ][these ][jurisdictional High ][Courts'] l0.Asaresultofwhich,whatwearefacingissteepincreaseoflitigation [day ][in ][and day ][out ][even ][though various ][orders have ][been]passed by [this ][High ][Court ][allowing ][writ ][petitions ][on the ][very ][same]issue. [The Income ]['t'ax ][authorities ][concemed are ][still ][even ][now ][in]2025 also [initiating ][proceedings ][in ][contravention ][to ][the provisions]of Section [15lA ][of ][the ][Act ][and ][as ][a result ][by ][now' ][more ][than 600]toT00petitionshavebeenalreadygotpiledupbeforethisHighCourt on [an ][issue ][which ][otherwise ][stands squarely covered ][by ][the]judgment of this [Court ][in ][the ][case ][of ][Kanakala ][Ravindra ][Reddy](1 supra). [What ][is ][also surprising ][is ][the fact that ][though while]the [writ ][petitions ][in ][the ][case ][of ][Kanakala ][Ravindra]allowing Reddy (l supra), [the ][Division ][Bench ][while ][reserving the ][right ][of]the Revenue, [has also ][protected ][the ][interest ][of ][the ][petitioners] insofar as the tiberty which was granted to the Revenue forinitiating fresh proceedings strictry in accordance u,ith the amendedinitiating fresh proceedings strictry in accordance u,ith the amendedprovisions of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2020 andthe Finance Act,2021. The petitioner assessee vyould be entitled tochallenge or raise the other legal objections if the Revenue initiatesfresh proceedings. The other legal objections if the Revenue initiatesfresh proceedings. The Department has made no endeavour inavailing the said liberty that was reseryed for the Revenue. On thecontrary, they have been still sticking on to the stand, which thisHigh Coun as well as many other High Courts already held to bebadavailing the said liberty that was reseryed for the Revenue. On thecontrary, they have been still sticking on to the stand, which thisHigh Coun as well as many other High Courts already held to bebad 1 1. It appears that because of the aforesaid liberty that this Highcourt had granted permitting the Revenue for initiating freshcourt had granted permitting the Revenue for initiating freshproceedings as a one-time measure in a faceless manner, theIncome Tax Department wants to take advantage of the same byprotracting these proceedings which would enable them to meet thelimitation that would otherwise come in the way. Likewise, if thewrit petition is kept pending for a considerable long period of timeIncome Tax Department wants to take advantage of the same byprotracting these proceedings which would enable them to meet thelimitation that would otherwise come in the way. Likewise, if thewrit petition is kept pending for a considerable long period of timeand finally at a later stage if the Hon,ble Supreme Court confirmsthe decision taken by this High Court as also by the other Highthe decision taken by this High Court as also by the other HighCourts in which the SLps are still pending, the Income Tax Department [wouid ][get ][the advantage ][of ][the ][liberty ][that ][is ][otherwtse]protected [in ][favour ][of ][the ][Revenue ][for ][initiation ][of ][fresh]proceedings [from ][the disposal ][of ][these matters at ][a ][much iater ][stage]which [would be ][advanmgeous and ][beneficial ][to ][the Revenue ][and]would [be ][equally ][disadvantageous ][and ][detrimental ][so ][far ][as ][interest]of the [assesses ][are ][concerned' As ][a consequence' the ][Income Tax]Department [gets an extended ][period ][of time ][for ][initiation ][of ][fresh]proceedings. Department [wouid ][get ][the advantage ][of ][the ][liberty ][that ][is ][otherwtse]protected [in ][favour ][of ][the ][Revenue ][for ][initiation ][of ][fresh]proceedings [from ][the disposal ][of ][these matters at ][a ][much iater ][stage]which [would be ][advanmgeous and ][beneficial ][to ][the Revenue ][and]would [be ][equally ][disadvantageous ][and ][detrimental ][so ][far ][as ][interest]of the [assesses ][are ][concerned' As ][a consequence' the ][Income Tax]Department [gets an extended ][period ][of time ][for ][initiation ][of ][fresh]proceedings. 12. [The alarming ][trend ][of ][docket ][explosion ][in ][this ][Court' ][despite]the clear [precedent ][set ][io ][Kanakala Ravindra ][Reddy ][(1 ][supra)' ][is ][a]matter [of ][grave concern' ][The ][Income ][Tax ][Department's persistent]initiation [of ][fresh proceedings, disregarding the ][established ][judicial]pronouncements, [has ][led ][to ][an ][unprecedented ][surge ][in ][litigation]withover600-T00petitionspilinguponthesameissue.Thisdeliberate [approach ][not only ][undermines ][the ][principle of judicial]precedent [but ][also strains ][the ][judicial ][resources ][unnecessarily' The]Department's [strategy ][of ][awaiting the ][Supreme ][Court's decision ][on]pending [SLPs ][white ][continuing ][to ][initiate ][fresh ][proceedings]appears [to ][be ][a ][calculated ][move ][to ][buy ][time ][and ][circumvent]limitation [periods, rather ][than ][adhering ][to ][the ][established ][legal] posltion. Such conduct raises serious questions about theadministrativeefficiency and therespect for judicialpronouncements, particularly when this Court has already provideda balanced approach by presen,ing both the Revenue,s rights andassesses tnlerests 13. Another aspect which needs to be considered is that in fact itshould have been realized by the Income Tax Department itself andshould have found out via media in ensuring that proceedingsunder Sections 14g_A and l4g should not have been issued in afaceless manner, at least till the Hon,ble Supreme Court decide thetwelve hundred (1200) odd SLps which it is arready seized ofor, arleast the Income. Tax Department shourd have tbund out someremedial steps to ensure that wherever the authorities intend toinitiate proceedings under Sections l4g_A and l4g, other than in afaceless manner, the proceedings should have been deferredwithout precipitating the matter further intimating the assessee thatthey shall initiate appropriare proceedings only after the SLp,s aredecided by the Hon,ble Supreme Court on the very same issue.This again, the Income Tax Department, has not been able to give aconvincing reply, except for the fact that such a decision if at all has [to be ][taken, has ][to be taken ][for ][the ][whole ][of ][India' ][and ][which]otherwise [has ][to ][be ][by ][way ][of ][a ][policy ][decision ][and ][that ][too ][at ][the]tevel of [Central ][Board ][of ][Direct ][Taxes ][Though ][the ][leamed]Standing [Counsel ][for ][the ][Income ][Tax ][Department ][contended that]the Delhi [High Courl ][dismissed ][a ][writ ][petition ][of ][similar ][nature' ][on]the one [hand ][when ][the High ][Cou( is ][struggling ][to ][reduce ][its]pendency, [such notices ][which ][are under ][challenge ][in ][this ][writ]petition [are ][forcing ][the ][assessee ][to ][knock ][the ][doors ][of ][this ][High]Court [resulting ][in ][filing ][of ][hundreds ][of ][new ][writ ][petitions ][which ][in]the long [run not ][only ][affects the ][disposat ][of ][the ][writ ][petitions but]also [consumes ][substantial ][time ][of ][the ][Bench ][in ][hearing ][these]matters [again and again ][on ][daily ][basis' ][Admittedly' ][in ][spite ][of ][the]matter [before ][the ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court having ][been ][taken ][on]many [occasions, the ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][which ][is ][seized ][of ][the]matterhasb€enreluctantingrantinganyinterimprotectiontotheIncome [Tax ][Depaftment' ][Yet' ][the ][authorities ][concerned ][at ][the]State level [are ][not ][ready ][to ][accept the ][verdict ][passed ][by ][a ][maj ][ority]of High [Courts ][of ][different ][States ][on the ][same issue; and ][to ][make]things [fuither ][worse, ][the ][[ncome ][Tax ][Department ][is ][showing]audacity [by issuing ][notices ][continuously under Sections 148-A ][and] 148 through the jurisdictional Assessing Officer whereas it oughtto have been only in the faceless manner. 14. In the case of BANK OF INDIA r.s. ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER, INCOME TAXil, on an issue wherher it wasjustifiable on the part of the Income Tax Department in notfollowing an order passed by the adjudicating authority only on theground that the appeals are pending, the Division Bench of theHigh Court of Bombay held at paragraph No.25 as under, viz., : "25 Mr. [paridwara ]has righty drawn out attention to thedecision of this Court in Commissioner of lncome Tax vs. Smt.Godavaridevi Sarafl2 as also the recent decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Ccof wh ch one of us (rr..*':.':.til:rilT]J:j::::1, ;r::;the Court categorically observed that the Revenue having not"accepted,, the judgment of the High Court would not mean that tillthe same is set aside in a manner known to law, it would loose itsbinding force. Referring lo the decision of the Supreme Court inUnion of lndia vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd.r4, thecourt observed that the approach of the officiars of Revenue oftreating decisions ,,not being acceptable,, was criticized by theSupreme Court. ln such decision, following are the relevantobservations made by the Supreme Court. r^o_r"?t,,, '' I [j ]I 1 1r. l.l [maru,. ][com ][422 ][( ][B omba ][y ][| ]|[978] I I] ITR 589 (Bombay)'' t' [2024] 165 raxmann.com 5g l/300 Taxman 452 (Bombay)ltggZl taxmann.com 16/55 ELT 433 (SC) r^o_r"?t,,, '' I [j ]I 1 1r. l.l [maru,. ][com ][422 ][( ][B omba ][y ][| ]|[978] I I] ITR 589 (Bombay)'' t' [2024] 165 raxmann.com 5g l/300 Taxman 452 (Bombay)ltggZl taxmann.com 16/55 ELT 433 (SC) "6. Sri Reddy [is ][perhaps ][right ][in ][saying ][that ][the]officers [were ][not ][actuated ][by ][any ][mala ][fides ][in]the [impugned ][orders ][They ][perhaps]passing felt [that the claim of ][the ][assessee ][was ][not]genuinely tenable [and ][that, ][if ][it ][was ][accepted' ][the ][Revenue]would suffer. [But what ][Sri ][Reddy overlooks ][is ][that ][we]are not [concerned ][here ][with ][the ][correctness ][or]otherwise [of ][their ][conclusion ][or ][of ][any ][factual]malafides [but with the ][fact ][that the ][officers' ][in reaching]in their [conclusion, by-passed ][wo ][appellate orders ][in]to [the ][same ][issue ][which were ][placed ][before]regard them, one [of ][the Collector ][(Appeals) and ][the other ][of]the Tribunal. [The ][High ][Court ][has' ][in our view' ][rightly]criticized [this ][conduct of ][the ][Assistant ][Collectors and]the harassment [to ][the ][assessee caused by ][the ][failure]of these [officers ][to ][give ][effect ][to ][the ][orders ][of]authorities [higher to them in the appellate ][hierarchy ][lt]cannot [be ][too ][vehemently emphasized ][that ][it is ][of]utmost [importance ][that, ][in ][disposing ][o{ ][the]issues [before them' revenue officers ][are]quasi.ludicial bound by [the ][decisions ][of ][the ][appellate ][authorities]The order [of the ][Appellte Collector ][is ][binding ][on ][the]Assistant [Collectors working within his jurisdiction and]the order [of ][the ][Tribunal ][is binding ][ilpon ][the Assistant]Cdllectors [and ][the ][Appellate Collectors ][who ][function]under the [jurisdiction ][of ][the ][Tribunal. ][The principles ][of]judicial discipline'require [that the orders ][of ][the ][higher]appellate authoritles [should be followed ][unreservedly].by [the ][subordinate ][authorities. The ][mere ][fact ][that the]order of the appellate [authority ][is ][not ]["acceptable" to]the department - [in ][itself ][an ][objectionable phrase ]-and is the sub.iect [matter ][of an appeal can furnish ][no]ground for not following it unless [its ][operation ][has]been suspended [by ]a [competent ][court. ][lf ][this healthy] rule is not followed, the result will only be undueharassment to assesses and chaos in administrationof tax laws 1)We have dealt with this aspect at some length,because it has been suggestedbythe learnedAdditional Solicitor General thattheobservationsAdditional Solicitor General thattheobservationsmade by the High Court, have been harsh on theofficers. lt is clear that the observations of the HighCourt, seemingly vehement, and apparenflyofficers. lt is clear that the observations of the HighCourt, seemingly vehement, and apparenflyunpalatable to the Revenue, are only intended to curba tendency in revenue matters which, if allowed toa tendency in revenue matters which, if allowed tobecome widespreQd, could result in considerableharassment to the assesses_p