Wp/2460/2024 Of Satya Narayan Tanwar v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1)
High Court
01 Feb 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/2460/2024 Of Satya Narayan Tanwar v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1)
Date of order
01 Feb 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/2460/2024 Of Satya Narayan Tanwar v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
Decision: I n view of the same, we are inclined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH AT HYDERABAD(SPecial Original [Jurisdiction)]
THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND
PRESENT
THE I.IONOURABLE [P. ] ANDTHE HONOURABLE [N. ]
WRIT [P] [N][O:2][ 460 ][0F ][2024]
Between:"""-s-riw Tanwar' [as-el ]years, 3-5-301,Narayan Tanwar, S/o Sri omprakash. ^5^1Fi;i fu [.' ]e0 i, [Ram ][rrlo'liin ][t'l-ivi ][s' ][na'i' ][rote' ] [vd ][e ][ra ][ba ][d ][- ][500 ][00 ][1]...PETITIONER
AND1ThelncomeTaxofficer,WardT(1),lncomeTaxDepartment,Hyderabad2A'Jrei'#;';t [i_rnit ][rnti,.b raiddpSrt."nr, ][Natronal ][e-Assessment ][center]G"r;6;ii,i:'R;;ti.l [ilii+oi ][, ][z"'o ][n6''' ][r-nimp ][Jawaharlal Nehru ][stadium']New Delhi
...RES'ONDENTS
Petition [under ][Article ][226 ][of ][the ][Constitution.of lndia ][praying ][that in ][the]cir"rr.Ln"-"s [lt"GO ][in ][tie ][attiJ"'it ][filed ][therewith' ][the ][High ][Court ][may ][be]a writ [oi ][rtl'no""t ][or anv ][other ][appropriate ][writ ][order ][or];i;;;1; ;ue Direction declaring [a tne oiOer ][patt"O ][oV ][the i ][st ][Resoondent ][u/s ][l ][aBA(d) ][of ][the]lncome [Tax Act ][rsor ][oateileioiizozz'o.rlng ] [and ][Notice No DIN ][Notice]No. IrBA/AST/Ft14}N2o2;-7lioiiszaqs7(1) [for the A ] [2016-17 ][and ][Notice]under 148 [of ][tne ][ect ][viAe ] [Notice ][No ] [112022-]2311051699418(1) [for the ][n.V. ][ioro-rz ][dated 30/03/2023 ][as ][arbitrary illegal ][bad]in law void-ab-initio [violative ][of the ][principles ][of ][natural ][iustice ][apart ][froT,Eins]viotative of [Artictes ][r+,rggIJ ][iol ][or ][tn" ][constitution ][oi ][lndia and Sec ][148A ][of]the lncome [Tax ][Act ][f ][gOf ][anO ][co-nsequently ][set ][aside ][the ][same in ][the interests of]justice.
@,"ouon,*erSection151CPCprayingthatinthecircumslancesstatedin the affidavit [filed ][in ][sup'io't-"t ][tn" ][petitionl ][the High ][Court ][may ][!e.9lea1ed]please direct tne respontlnts [to ][slay ][all ][further ][oroceedinqs. including ][any]recovery, [pursuant ][to the ][notice ][issuei ][by ][the ][1st Resoondent' ][u/s ]['148 ][of ][the]tncome Tax [Act, ][1961,"";;; ][-DlN ][f'iotice^^No ][tieRlRsrlsltaSlt2o22']23i1051699418(1) [for ][the'A.i ]['iolO-tt ][dated ][30-03-2O23' ][for ][the ][Assessment]7-i^iiota-lt, [p"nOing ][disposal of ][the ][NIain ][Whit ][Pelition']Coun."f for [the ][Petition"tt ][M/t' ] !1!G.IlCounsel for [the ][Respona"nitt ][Snf ][J'V' ] [(SC ] [TAX)]if," C""tt made [the'following: ]
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TTIKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No.2460 0F 2024
ORDER: (per lt<n'bte.Sri Jrr.srice P.SAM KOSHfl)
The instant Writ perition has been Iiled theby petitioner uncler Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the follor,r,ing relief
"to issue a Writ of Mondomus or ooy othet oppropriote Writ, Order orDirection decloring the order possed by the 1st Respondent u/s 14BA(d)of the lncone Tox Act 1961 doted 2B/O3/2023 beoring DIN ond NoticeNo DtN Notice No ITEA/AST/F/148A/2O22.23/10515r84g7(1) for theA.Y. 2076-17 ond Notice under 148 of the Act vide DtN N'oiice tto.|TBA/AST/S/148_1/2022.2 3/lls16gsa B(1) for the A.y.2016_17 ddted3O/03/2O2i os orbttrory. i egot, bod in low, void-ob_initio, violotive ofthe principles of noturol justice oport from being violotive of Articles 14199 ond 265 of the Constitution ol tndio ond Sec 14gA of thi tncome foxAct 7961 ond consequently set oside the some in the iiterests ol Justiceand to poss".
2.
"to issue a Writ of Mondomus or ooy othet oppropriote Writ, Order orDirection decloring the order possed by the 1st Respondent u/s 14BA(d)of the lncone Tox Act 1961 doted 2B/O3/2023 beoring DIN ond NoticeNo DtN Notice No ITEA/AST/F/148A/2O22.23/10515r84g7(1) for theA.Y. 2076-17 ond Notice under 148 of the Act vide DtN N'oiice tto.|TBA/AST/S/148_1/2022.2 3/lls16gsa B(1) for the A.y.2016_17 ddted3O/03/2O2i os orbttrory. i egot, bod in low, void-ob_initio, violotive ofthe principles of noturol justice oport from being violotive of Articles 14199 ond 265 of the Constitution ol tndio ond Sec 14gA of thi tncome foxAct 7961 ond consequently set oside the some in the iiterests ol Justiceand to poss".
2.
2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act n,hich came into effect fromOl.O4.2O2l, the respondents, u,hile proceeding underSection 148 of the Act, rt ere required to issue notice underSection 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to theassessee. As pcr the amencled provision of law,theproceedings to be drar,r,n are also in a faceless manner.
3. Whereas, learned 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.25903 ][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, [learned Standing ][Counsel ][for ][the]respondent-Department [does ][not ][dispute ][that the ][said]objection was decided [in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions. Hou'eter, hc furthcr [contended ][that ][apart ][from]the aforesaid objection, [there ][have been ][other ][various]also [u'hich ][thc ][petitioner ][has raised ][in ][the ][writ]objections petition.
So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of ][the ][learned counsel for]][[the ][learned counsel for]][[learned counsel for]]
5. So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of ][the ][learned counsel for]][[the ][learned counsel for]][[learned counsel for]]the respondcnt [Dcpartment ][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 petitiotteris susloined and all these writ petitrons stnnds alloruedorr this uery jurisdictionol issue. Since the impugned.is susloined and all these writ petitrons stnnds alloruedorr this uery jurisdictionol issue. Since the impugned.t.toticc.s and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further andjurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further anddecide the other issues raised by the petitioner uthichstands reserued to be raised qnd contended in an"appropiate proceeding s. "appropiate proceeding s.
'38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had,, in the caseof Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time measuree-xercising the pouters under Article 142 of theCon_stitution of lndia, pemitted the Reuenue to pioceeduncler the substituted prouisions, and. thii Courtallountq the petitions only on the procedurat Jtau,t, fheight <'onfened on the Reuenue tuould, remain reseruedto proceed further if theg so want from the stage of theorder of the Supreme Court in the case oy einisnAganuctl, supra."
6.
6. I n view of the same, 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 inerccordance with the amended provision but under theun amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable.
6.
6. I n view of the same, 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 inerccordance 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 reservcd as isenvisarged at paragraph Nos.37 & 3g of the said orderpassccl in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs.
To,
Consequently, miscellaneous [petitions ][pending, ][if]
any, shall stand [closed]
SD/. K.SREERAMA ASSISTANT
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
l.ThetncomeTaxofficer,WardT(1),lncomeTaxDepartment,Hyderabad' i. A;;";;";t i.orn [Unit ][lncome'iaio'ip5rtment, ]r'lo +or znJFtbor., E-Rimp [National ]Jawaharlal Nehru [e-Assessment ]Stadium'[center]i'ffiD;i;i: ' New DelhiDelhi' i. A;;";;";t i.orn [Unit ][lncome'iaio'ip5rtment, ]r'lo +or znJFtbor., E-Rimp [National ]Jawaharlal Nehru [e-Assessment ]Stadium'[center]i'ffiD;i;i: ' New DelhiDelhi
New DelhiDelhi3ffi;6;'i; Ni1/s. [sANGHl, ][Advocate-[oPU9] ]-..^.4ffi EE i;SRr [i.V. ][PRAdAo ][tSc ][FoR ][TNCoMETAX) ][[oPUC]]4ffi EE i;SRr [i.V. ][PRAdAo ][tSc ][FoR ][TNCoMETAX) ][[oPUC]]
4EE i;SRr i;SRr 5. Two CD [CoPies]5. Two CD [CoPies]
BNGJPGJP
HIGH COURT
DATED:01 10212024
ORDERWP.No.2460 of 2024
ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS
\/(4G?\q\ijr_
\.)? [ii'6 ][llrl]l ):;3.,- I :t t',\-t:..i:::-,
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.