Wp/24989/2024 Of Mrs.padma Gurram v. The Income Tax Officer

[3411 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARA,PU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 24989 OF 2024 Between: Mrs.Padma Gurram, C/o. Gurram Venkat Reddy, Aged about 53 years, Occ;Residing at D.No.8-2-368, Sundariah Nagar, Manuguru 8.O., Khammam-5071 17. .....PETITIONER AND 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-1 , lncome Tax Office, Kothagudem. 2. The Pr. Chief Commissioner, lncome Tax Department, Hyderabad. 3. Union of lndia, represented by its Secretary to the Government, Ministry ofFinance, New Delhi-l ['10001 ].Finance, New Delhi-l ['10001 ]. .....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 tVandamus'or any other applicable writ declaring and setting aside [(i) ]theimpugned notice dated 08.02.2024 vide DIN and Letter No. ITBA/AST/F11712023'2411060639419( 1 ) issued under Seclion 1 48 A( a) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 ,(ii) the Notice dated 28.02.2024 vide DIN and Notice No.ITBAiAST/F/148tu(SCNy2023-2411061656310('1 ) issued under Section 148A(b)of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 , [(iii) ]the Order dated 29.03.2024 vide DIN andNoticeNo. |TBAJASTiFll4BAl2023-24l1063590502(1) [passed ]under Section 14BA [(d) ]ofthe lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequential [(iv) ]impugned Show Cause Noticedated 30.03.2024 [vide ] [and ][Notice ][No. ] [112023-] 2411063712243(1 ) issued under Sectron 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 andany consequential notices and orders for being without jurisdiction, in violation ofany consequential notices and orders for being without jurisdiction, in violation ofprinciples of natural justice, patently illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 andArticle ['l ]9(1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia.Article ['l ]9(1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia. l.A.NO:'l OF 2024 Petition Under Section ['1 ]5'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay(i) the impugned notice dated 08.02.2024 vide DIN & Letter No.ITBA/AST/F/I712023-2411060639419(1 issued under Section [.148A(a) ]of the) lncome Tax Act, 1961, (ii) the Notice daled 28.02.2024 vide DIN & Notice No.IrBA/AST/F/1 4BA(scNy2023-24/i 061 65631 0(1 ) issued under secrion 148A(b)of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, (iii) the order dated 29.03.2024 vide DIN & NoticeNo. |rBA/ASTlFl148Al2023-24l'1063590502(1) passed under section 148A (d) ofthe lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequential (iv) impugned Show Cause Noticedated 30.o3.2024 vide DrN & Notice No. rrBA/AST/s/148 112023-2411063712243(1 ) issued under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 . Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KARAN TALWAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2Ms. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (Jr. SCFOR TNCOME TAX)FOR TNCOME TAX) Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI B.MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTING SRIGADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the foltowing ORDER THE HONOURABLE ANDTHE HONOURABLE WRIT PETIT [No.249a9 ][0F ][2024] ORDER: (per Hon'ble [Justice ][Sujog ][Paul)] Heard Sri Karan [Talwar, learned ][counsel ][for ][t'he] B. [Sapna Reddy, ][learned ][Junior ][Standing]petitioner(s), Ms. Counsel for [Income Tax ][Department, for respondent ][Nos'1 ][&]2 and Sri B. [Mukherjee, learned counsel ][representing]Sri Gadi Praveen [Kumar, ][Iearned ][Deputy ][Solicitor ][General ][of]India, for respondent [No.3.] Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI B.MUKHERJEE, REPRESENTING SRIGADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the foltowing ORDER THE HONOURABLE ANDTHE HONOURABLE WRIT PETIT [No.249a9 ][0F ][2024] ORDER: (per Hon'ble [Justice ][Sujog ][Paul)] Heard Sri Karan [Talwar, learned ][counsel ][for ][t'he] B. [Sapna Reddy, ][learned ][Junior ][Standing]petitioner(s), Ms. Counsel for [Income Tax ][Department, for respondent ][Nos'1 ][&]2 and Sri B. [Mukherjee, learned counsel ][representing]Sri Gadi Praveen [Kumar, ][Iearned ][Deputy ][Solicitor ][General ][of]India, for respondent [No.3.] The ground taken by ground taken by by [[the ][learned ][counsel ][for ][the]][[learned ][counsel ][for ][the]][[counsel ][for ][the]][[for ][the]][[the]] 2. The ground taken by ground taken by by [[the ][learned ][counsel ][for ][the]][[learned ][counsel ][for ][the]][[counsel ][for ][the]][[for ][the]][[the]]is that in [furtherance ][of ][Finance Act' ][2O2l' ][re-]petitioner(s) assessment [process stood ][modified ][but the ][respondents ][have]not taken care [of ][it ][and ][therefore ][notice ][issued ][under ][Section]1 48 of the Income Tax [Act, ][196 ][1 ][cannot sustain judicial]Since [notice is bad ][in ][law, ][the consequential ][orders]scrutiny. are also bad in [law.] 3. During the course [of ][hearing, learned ][counsel ][for ][the]parties agreed that curtains [on ][this ][issue ][are ][frnally drawn ][by]this Court in [a ]batch [of ][writ ][petitions, W'P'No'25903 ][of 2022]and other connected [matters, ][decided ][by ][common ][order] a dated 14.09.2023. Tlne parties agreed that this marrer may be disposed of in terms of the Common Order dated 14.O9.2023. 4. This Court in the said order dated 14.O9.20231nW.P.No.259O3 of 2022, held as under: "35. In view of the aforesaid discussions, it is by now veryclear that the proccdure to be followed by the respondent_Department upon treating the lrotices issued fot reassessmentbeing under Section 148A, the subsequent proceedings qrashandatorily required to be undertaken under the substitutedprovisions as laid down under the Finance Act, 2c/21. ln theabsence of which, qre are constraiued to hold that theprocedure adopted by the respondent_DepartEent is incontravention to the statute i.e. the Fiuance Act, 2O21, at thefirst instance. Secondly, it is also in direct conttavention tothe directives issued by the Hotr'ble Supreme Court in thccase of Ashish Agarwal, supta. 36. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned notices issuedarld the proceediDgs drawn by the rcspondent_DepartmeDt isneither tenable, [or sustainable. The notices so issued andthe procedure adopted beiEg per se illegat, deserves to be andare accordingly set aside/quashed. As a consequence, all theimpugncd orders getting quashed, the consequentia[ ordetspassed by the respoadent Department pursuant to the noticesissued under Section l4Z and l4g crould also get quashed andit is ordered accordingly. The reason Ee are quashitrg theconseqirential order is on the principles that tflhen theinitiation of the proceediugs itself was proceduraLly wrong,the subsequent ordets also gets nuuified automatically.37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner issustained and all these writ petitions stands alloEed on thisvery jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices andorders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we arenot inclined to proceed further and decide the other issuesraised by th(j petitioner which stands leserved to be raisedand contcndcd in an appropriate proceeditrgs. 38. siDce the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case ofAshish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure er.ercising thepowers under Article 142 of the CoDstitution of India. \ \ .*i:ffi yj \ 38. siDce the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case ofAshish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure er.ercising thepowers under Article 142 of the CoDstitution of India. \ \ .*i:ffi yj \ permitted the Revenue [to ][proceed ][under ][the ][substituted]provisions, alrd this [court ][allowing ][thc ][petitions ][only ][on ][tbe]procedurel flas, [thc ][right ][conferred ][on ][the ][Revenue would]remain [reserwed ][to ][ploceed ][further ][if ][they ][so want ][from ][the]stage of the [order ][of ][the ][Suptcme ][Court ia ][the ][case ][of ][Ashish]AgarEal, [suPra.] 39. l{o [order ][a6 ][to ][costs'"] 5. In view of [the ][consensus ][arrived' ][the ][impugrred ][Show]Cause notice [and ][consequential ][orders ][passed ][in ][this ][writ]are [set aside. ][Liberty ][is ][reserved ][to ][both ][the ][parties]petition to take [respective ][stand ][and ][to ][proceed ][in ][accordance ][with]law as [per ][paragraph No'38 ][of ][the order ][dated ][14'O9'2023 ][in]W.P.No.259O3 [of ][2022'] 6. The Writ [Petition ][rs][ allowed. ][No ][costs. ][Interlocutory] applications, [if ][any ][pendinq ],:!dl =l1o-"tfgjl9:99'- SD/. P.CH.NAGABHUSHBAASSISTANTREGtRARSECTIONFICER //TRUE To,1.The lncome [Tax Officer. ][Ward-1' ][lncome ][Tax ][Office' ][Kothagudem']2.rhe Pr. Chief [commissroner'i";";;i'; ][Department' Hvderabad']3.The secretary [to ][tne ][ooverJrni'"iil ][u=tit?i"Ti'iJ'' ][rt'rinittw of Finance' ][New] 3. 4.Bli dd'liH: [#&,mb'skH'ff +tss:rl?138"?R ] [coM ][E]Bli dd'liH: [#&,mb'skH'ff +tss:rl?138"?R ] [coM ][E]bHl#['8ff [LTol?*uttN ][KUMAR' DEPUTY ][solrcrroR ] oF INDIA [(OPUC)]Hl#['8ff [LTol?*uttN ][KUMAR' DEPUTY ][solrcrroR ] oF INDIA [(OPUC)] 4. Two CD [CoPies] 7 SA o Ii HIGH COURT DATED:1110912024 ORDER WP.No.24989 of 2024 ALLOWING THE W.PWITHOUT COSTS. 22el4\P