Wp/25978/2022 Of Sri Thirupathi Rao Saineni v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 25978 OF 2022 Between: Sri Thirupathi Rao Saineni, S/o. Sri S. Yeshwant Rao, 1-4-1741G4, [Shirisha]Apartment, Layola College Road, Old [Alwal, ][Secunderabad ][- ][50001 ][1,]Telangana ...PETITIONER AND lncome Tax Officer, Ward -15(1), l.T. Towers, A.C. Gurads, [Masabtank,]Hyderabad -500004. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of [lndia ][praying ][that in ][the]circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the [High ][Court may ][be]pleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OFMANDAMUS holding that the order [passed ]by respondent [u/s.148A(d) ][of ][the ][Act,]dt.22.O4.2022 with DIN:|TBAlASTlFl148A12022-2311042821063(1) [and ][the ][notice]dated 22.04.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act [with ][DIN:ITBfuAST/S/148]112022-2311042821451(1) for the assessment [year 2015-16, as being illegal ][and]passed in gross violation of principles of natural [justice ]without application ofmind and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 15'l CPC [praying ][that ][in ][the ][circumstances ][stated]in the affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ][the ][High ][Court ][may ][be ][pleased to]suspend the operation of the notice issued [by ][the ][respondent u/s.148 ][of ][the ][Act,]dt.22.O4.2022 for the assessment [yeat ][2015-16 ][with ] 1 12022-2311042821 451(1) and all consequential [proceedings ][thereto.] lA NO: 1 OF 2023 PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit [filed ][in support of the petition, ][the ][High ][Court ][may be pleased ][to]tn" F"titioner to [raiie ][the ][above Additional ][Affidavit ][legal contention ][in the]plirit writ [petition ][in ][the ][interest ][of ][justice'] Counsel for [the Petitioner: ][SRI A.V. ] CounselfortheRespondent:Ms.B.SWAPNAREDDY(Jr.scFoRlNcoMETAx) The Court made [the ][following: ] THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIW.P. No. 2597a of 2o22 ORDER (per Hon'ble Si Justtce P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. A.V. Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitionerand Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel for IncomeTax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record. 2. The instant petition has been hled challenging the AssessmentOrder passed by respondent No. 1 under section 148A(d) of the IncomeTax Act, 196I (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 22.04.2022for the Assessment Year 2015- 16. 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in thepresent writ petition is that under the amended provisions of the Actwhich came into effect from 01.04.2021, the respondents whileproceeding under Section 148 of the Act were required to issue noticeunder Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to theassessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to bedrawn are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, it has been contendedby the petitioner that in the instant case, reopening has been initiatedby the Juridictional Assessing Officer. In respect of the said objectionthat the petitioner had raised, he relied upon the recent batch of writpetitions decided by this very Bench on 14.09 .2023 videW.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch to the limited extent. * Etffi\ \ ':;\,/ 4. Learned counsel for [the ][Department ][would ][not ][dispute ][of]having decided the [said ][objection ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][matters']However, Iearned [counsel ][submits ][that ][apart ][from the ][afore ][said]objection, there [have been ][other ][various objections also ][which ][the]petitioner has raised [in ][the ][writ ][petition'] * Etffi\ \ ':;\,/ 4. Learned counsel for [the ][Department ][would ][not ][dispute ][of]having decided the [said ][objection ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][matters']However, Iearned [counsel ][submits ][that ][apart ][from the ][afore ][said]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]Department1Sconcerned, this [Bench, ][while ][disposing ][of]W.P.No.25903 of 2022 [and batch had taken ][note ][of ][the ][same ][tn]Nos.37 [& ][38 ][which ][is reproduced ][herein under:]paragraph - "37. Tint'. preliminary [objection ][raised ][by the ][petitioner ][rs]sustaine(l and [all ][these ][writ ][petitions ][stands allowed ][on this ][very]jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned [notices ][and ][orders ][ane]"getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we are not inclined tof,.o..""a [' further ][and ][decide ][the ][other ][issues raised ][by ][the]petitioner which stands [reserved ][to ][be ][raised ][and ][contended ][in ][an]appropriate Proceedings." 38. Since the [Hon'ble Supreme ][Court had, ][in ][the ][case ][of Ashish]as a [one-time ][measure exercising ][the ][powers]Agarwal, supra, uider Article 142 [of ][the ][Constitution ][of ][India, ][Permitte'l ][the]Revenue to [proceed ][under ][the ][substituted ][provisions, ][and ][this]Court allowing the [petitions only ][on ][the procedural flaw, the right]conferred on the [Revenue ][would remain ][resewed ][to ][proceed]further if they [so ][want from the ][stage ][of ][the ][order of the ][Supremc]Court in the case [oI ][Ashish Agarwal, supra'] 6. In view of the same, [we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the ][present ][writ]petition also on similar terms. [Accordingiy, ][the ][present ][Writ ][Petition]stands allowed [on ][the objection ][of ][the ][petitioner ][that ][the ][proceedings]have not been drawn [in ][accordance ][with ][the ][amended provision ][but]under the unamended [provision which ][is ][otherwise ][not ][sustainable']AshasbeenheldbythisBenchintheaforesaidbatchmatters,the l: t- right of the respondents would [stand ][reserved ][as ][is ][envisaged ][in]Iparagraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said batch. No [order as to ][costs.]. 7. Consequently, miscellaneous [petitions ][pending, ][if ][any, ][shall]stand closed sD/'P'c-rlru+fffHsl31g11 //ffRUE sECmoFFICER '" ; Hi,=",gi;iiidl:.* [ffi ][#;**:: ] [il"'] BNGJPw- HIGH COURT DATED:0611112023 ORDERWP.No.25978 of [2022] ALLOWING THE WRIT WITHOUT COSTS 6",trbDr\ ,t6e (vqf()21 [N'0''l ]['i[?3]ot* OES I,A1C