Wp/2189/2024 Of Mr. Venkata Rami Reddy Madduri v. The Income Tax Officer - Ward 3(1)

,- ,r. ilcouRr FoR rHE srArE oF TELANGANAII I AT HYDERABADoriginal Jurisdiction)! ltso""iut WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARYTHOUSAND AND TWENTY FOURPRESENTTHEff"URABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHYrxe rftrounaeLe s#TflsrcE N. TuKARAMJTluf*,, no' ,rrn or roro"=r,r,o* Between: I IMr. Venkata n#ri[heOOy Madduri, S/o. Madduri Subbareddy, aged 61 years,Occ. Salaried Etndloyee, Rl/o. Flat No. 202, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500...PETITIONER^-, ,^" *-:lJ"". ward 3(1), Hyderabad, sisnaturerowers, opp.Botanical Garddn, fiondapur, Hyderabad - 500 084, Telangana2. The Princip"f CiLtCor.issioner of lncome Tax, Andhra Pradesh andTelangand, Hydtrfrad Room No. 922, [gth ]Floor, B-Block, l.T.Towers, ['10-2-3,]AC Guards, Hyder6bad - 500 004, Telangana3. Assessment Urt, i..or" Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center,New Delhi, Roo?n l(lo. 4O1 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,New Delhi - 11d003I I ...RESP.NDENr. Petition unOerftr[cte 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances state{irt the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court rnay bepleased to issue a Wriflof Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order orDirection, declaring dl tfe order passed by the ['lst ]Respondent, u/s 14BA(d) ofthe lncome Tax Actft $Ot, OateO 23.03.2023, bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148At2022-23t1O512O44$6(1), for the Assessrnent Year 2016 - 17:& b. the notice issueft tly the ['lst ]Respondent, u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act,1961, dated 23.03.202dbearing DIN and Notice No. ITBAiAST/S/148 112022-2311O51204634(1),fot fl{eAssessment Year 2016 - ['17 ]as arbitrary, illegal, bad inlaw, void-ab-initio,vidhiVE of the principles of natural [justice, ]apart from beingviolative of Articles141(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia & Sec 148Aof the lncome TaxAtt961, and to consequently set aside the same in theinterests of [justice.] lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition underion 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed irt of the petition, the High Court may be [pleased ]tostay all further [pro]ncluding any recovery, [pursuant ]to the order [passed]by the 1st Responde48 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 , dated 23.03.2023,bearing DIN and Noto. ITBA/AST/S I [1 ]48 [1 I ]2022-23 [1 ][05 ][1 ]204634( [1 ]), [fo ][r ][the]Assessment Year 2of617; pending disposal of the above Writ Petition; Counsel for the: SRI A.V.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel to, tn" n""#Jents: SRI [J.V. ] [(Sr. ] [lNcoME ][TAX)]The Court made the fr,,[*,nn, oRDER ) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIIVRIT PETITIONNo.21a9 0F 2024 ORDER:@er F1o n'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY] The instant Writ Petition has been filed theby by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following relief: "to i^ssue a Wit of Mandamus or ang other appropiate WritOrder or Direction declaing a the order pasibd [-bg ]the IrtRespondent u/s 148Ad of the Income Tax Act 1g6j dated23.03.2023 beaing DIN and Notice tvoITBA/AST/ F/ 148A/202223/ 10512044661 .for theAssessment Year 2016 17and b the notice issued by the lstAssessment Year 2016 17and b the notice issued by the lstRespond.ent u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act 196l aated.23.03.2023 beaing DIN and_ Notice NoITBA/AST/ S/ 1481/202223/ 105j2046341 fo, tt.ieAssessment Year 2O 1 6 17 as arbitrary illegat bad in latu23.03.2023 beaing DIN and_ Notice NoITBA/AST/ S/ 1481/202223/ 105j2046341 fo, tt.ieAssessment Year 2O 1 6 17 as arbitrary illegat bad in latuuotd-ab-initio uiolatiue of the pincipLes of natural justicea?ar! frory being uiolatiue of Artictes la 190)@ and. 265 ofthe Constitution of India and Sec 148A of the Income Tox Act1961 and to consequentlA set aside the same in the interestsofjustiee".the Constitution of India and Sec 148A of the Income Tox Act1961 and to consequentlA set aside the same in the interestsofjustiee". 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act which carne into effect fromOl.M.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding underSection 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice underSection 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to tJle assessee. As per the amended provision of [law, ][the]proceedings to be drawn are a-lso in a faceless [manner.] Whereas, learned counsel counsel for the [[petitioner]] 3. Whereas, learned counsel counsel for the [[petitioner]]contended that, in the instant [case, reopening ][has ][been]initiated by the Jurisdictional [Assessing ][Officer. ][In ][support]of his contention, he relied upon the recent [judgment]rendered by this very Bench in [WP.No.259O3 ][of ][2022 &]batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this [Court ][disposed ][of ][the]batch of writ petitions to the limited [extent.] 4. On the other hand, Ieamed [Standing ][Counsel ][for ][the]respondent-Department does not dispute [that the ][said]objection was decided in the aforesaid [batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions. However, he further contended [that ][apart ][from]the aforesaid objection, there have [been ][other ][various]objections also which the [petitioner ][has raised ][in ][the ][writ]petition. 5. So far as this contention of the [learned ][counsel ][for]the respondent-Department [is ][concerned, ][this ][Bench, ][while]disposing of said batch of writ [petitions, ]had taken note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioneris sustoined and all these writ petitions stands ollou-tedon this uery [jurisdictional ]issue. Since the impugnednotices and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjuisdbtion, tt)e are not inclined to proceed further anddecide the otler issttes raised by the petitiorter uhichstartds reserued to be roised ond contended in an"appropiate p ro ceeding s. "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tlrc caseof Ashish Aganua| supra, as a one-time measureexercisirLg tLe pouers under Article 142 of tLrcConstitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceedunder the substituted proui.sions, and this Courtallouing the petitions onlg on tle proedural Jlaut, tleright anfened on the Reuenue u.tould remain reseruedto proceed further if tLey so u-nnt from tLrc stage of theorder of the Supreme Court in the case of AshishAgaruta| supra." 6. In view of the sarne, we are inclined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, thepresent Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection of thepetitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn inaccordallce with the amended provision but under theun-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 7. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batchmatters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & [38 ][of the ][said ][order]passed in the batch of writ [petitions. ][No ][order ][as ][to ][costs.]Consequently, miscellaneous [petitions pending, ][if ][any,] shall stand closed. SD/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAOASSISTANT //TRUE COPYI SECTION OFFICER To,1- Ward 3(1),Hyderabad, Signature Towers, opp.Botanical Gardapur, Hyderabad - 500 084, Telanqana2.pal chtCommissioner oflncome Tax, Andhra FradeshandTelangana, HRoom No. 922,gth Floor, B-Block, l.T.Towers, 10-2-3,AC Guards,ltbad - 500 004, Telan anas3nlti lhcome Tax Department, National e-Assessment CenterNew Delhi, Rootr No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru StadiumNew Delhi - 1'l0d34. One CC to SRt.\,.A. SIVA KARTI KEYA, Advocate loPUCl6. 5. Two One CD CoCC to SRIprPRASAD (Sr. SC FOR TNCOME TAX) IOPUC]BNGJP s 1p I HIGH COUR JI4 DATED:31/0 ] ORDERI WP.No.2189024 ALLOWING TWRIT PETITIONwrrHour co$t's -49cPf"Ivo