Wp/23213/2024 Of Venkateshwar Rao Ponnamaneni v. Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO: 23213 OF [2024] Between: AND Venkateshwar Rao Ponnamaneni, [S/o. ] [Hanmantha Rao,Aged ][about ][63]years, Occupation. Professor, H. No. ['1 ][.-8-724141A, ][Padma Colony, Road ][No.]1, Nallakunta lvlarket, Hyd [era ]bad-500044 ...PETITIONER 1. lncome Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nirmal, [lncome ][Tax Office' ][Nirmal-504101.] 2. The Chief Commissioner of [Income ][Tax, ][Hyderabad, ][1Oth ][Floor' C-Block, l.T']Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 3. The Assessment Unit, [lncome ][Tax ][Department, ][National ][Faceless]Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of [Finance, Room ][No. ][4O1 ],2"d [Floor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi-1 ][10003.]Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of [Finance, Room ][No. ][4O1 ],2"d [Floor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi-1 ][10003.] ...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 ][tn]the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring [the ][notice ][u/s 148 ][d1.27.O2.2024 ][vide]DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/148-112023-2411061607460(1) [issued ][bv the ][JAo(1st]respondent) instead [of ][FAo(3rd respondent) ][for ][A.Y. ][2017-18, as ][void, illegal, ][and]contrary to the [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 stated ][in]the affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ]the High Court [may be ][pteased ][to ][stay]all further proceedings [pursuant ]to the notice u/s [148 dt.27.02.2024 ][vide ] [No.]ITBA/ AST/S/1 4B-112023-2411 061607460(1) issued [by ][the JAO(1't ][respondent)]instead of FAC(3'd respondent) for A.Y. 2017-18,and may [pass ][such ][other]order(s) as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and [proper in ][the ][interests ][of ][substantial]justice, as otherwise the Petitioner would he put to irreparable loss and severeinjury. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. J SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR INCOME [TAX)]The Court made the following: ORDER THE HOIVOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJDSTIWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 232L3 0F 20.24 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Justice Sujog paul) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan; learned counsel for thepetitioner(s) and Ms. J.Sunitha, learned Junior StandingCounsel for Income Tax Department, for the respondents.2. The ground taken by the learned counsel for theCounsel for Income Tax Department, for the respondents.2. The ground taken by the learned counsel for thepetitioner(s) is.that in lurtherance of Financ e Act,2O2L, re-assessment process stood modified but the respondents havenot taken care of it and therefore notice issued under Section148 of the Income Tax Act, 196 1 cannot sustain judicialscrutiny. Since notice is bad in law, the consequential ordersare also bad in law.not taken care of it and therefore notice issued under Section148 of the Income Tax Act, 196 1 cannot sustain judicialscrutiny. Since notice is bad in law, the consequential ordersare also bad in law. 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for theparties agreed that curtains on this issue are fina1ly drawn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.p.No.25903 of 2022and other connected matters, decided by common orderdated 14.O9.2023. The parties agreed that this matter may bediso"gl"f in terms of the Common Order d,ated. 14.09.2023. 4. This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022, held as under: 3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for theparties agreed that curtains on this issue are fina1ly drawn bythis Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.p.No.25903 of 2022and other connected matters, decided by common orderdated 14.O9.2023. The parties agreed that this matter may bediso"gl"f in terms of the Common Order d,ated. 14.09.2023. 4. This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 inW.P.No.25903 of 2022, held as under: 'r35. [In ][view ][of the ][aforesaid discussioas, ]it is by [now ][very]clear that the procedure to be follolied by the respondent-Department upon treating the notiees issued for reassessmentbeing under Section 148A, the subsequerlt proceedings wasmandatorily required to be uldertaken under the substitutedprovisions as laid down undet the Finance Act,2021- In theabsence of $hich, we are constrained to hold that theprocedure adopted by the respondent-Department is incontravention to the statute i.e. the Finance Act, 2O21, at thefirst instance. Secoadly, it is also in direct colrtravention tothe directives issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Cou.t in thecase ofAshish Agarrral, supta. 36. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned notices issuedand the proceedings drawn by the respondent-Department isneither tenable, nor sustainable. The notices so issued andthe procedure adopted being per se iltegal, deserves to be andare accordingly set aside/quashed. As a consequence, all theimpugned orders getting quashed, the colsequential orderspassed by the respotrdent Department pursuant to the noticesissued under Sectiou 147 and 148 would also get quashed andit is ordered accordingly. The reason we are quashing theconsequential order is on the priaciples that when theinitiation of the proceedings itself was procedurally wrong,the subsequent orders also gets nullified automatically.37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner issustaiaed and all these writ petitions stands allowed on thisvery jurisdictional issue. Since the iErpugned notices andorders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we arenot inclined to proceed fulther and decide the other issuesraised by the petitioner which stands teserved to be raisedand contended in an app.opriate proceedings.38. Since th€ Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case ofAshish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising thepowers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India-perEitted the Revenue to proceed under the substitutedprovisions, and this Cou.t allowiag the petitions or1ly on theprocedural flaw, the right colrferred on the Revenue wouldremai! reserved to proceed fu.ther if they so want ftom the stage of the order of the Supreme Court i! the case of AshishAgarq,al, supra-39. No order as to costs." 5. In view of the consensus arrived, the impugned ShowCause notice and consequential orders, if any, passed in thisrvrit petition aie set aside. Liberty is reserved to both theparties to take respective stald and to proceed in accordancewith law as per paragraph No.38 of the order dated14.O9.2023 in W.P.No.259O3 of 2022. 6. The Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Interlocutoryapplications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.SD/. K. VENKAIAHASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY' \ $\----'SECTIdN.OFFICER To, 1 Jl !..pryC [Tax ][Officer, ][Wgrd-1 ][, ][Nirmat, ][Income Tax ][Office, ][Nirmal_504.101 ][.]2. The " Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad, iOth Floor, i glo.k, i.f.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.3. The Assessment Unit, lncohe Tax Department, National Faceless2. The " Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad, iOth Floor, i glo.k, i.f.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.3. The Assessment Unit, lncohe Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment Centre, Delhi, A/inistry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,Znd F6;;,- E_Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,'Delhi-.1 10003.Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,'Delhi-.1 10003. 10003.!. [One ] [to ][SRl. ] [SASHANK A/AN[/OHAN, ]Advocare IOPUCI5. One CC to SRl. J SUNTTHA (JUN|OR SC FOR tNCOIME'TAitAdvocatetoPUCl6. Two CD CopiesBIVGJP 5 1 Jl !..pryC [Tax ][Officer, ][Wgrd-1 ][, ][Nirmat, ][Income Tax ][Office, ][Nirmal_504.101 ][.]2. The " Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad, iOth Floor, i glo.k, i.f.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.3. The Assessment Unit, lncohe Tax Department, National Faceless2. The " Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Hyderabad, iOth Floor, i glo.k, i.f.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.3. The Assessment Unit, lncohe Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment Centre, Delhi, A/inistry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,Znd F6;;,- E_Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,'Delhi-.1 10003.Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,'Delhi-.1 10003. 10003.!. [One ] [to ][SRl. ] [SASHANK A/AN[/OHAN, ]Advocare IOPUCI5. One CC to SRl. J SUNTTHA (JUN|OR SC FOR tNCOIME'TAitAdvocatetoPUCl6. Two CD CopiesBIVGJP 5 HIGH COURT DATED:2710812024 ORDER WP.No.23213 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITIONWITHOUT COSTS 6).ri4v1\1\2,- (-)G [1.1-l ] [.S ][I] \ 1.,'c\7:-2 3 |,ET lfftl!))