Case LawHigh Court › Wp/32160/2023 Of Sridhar Kagne v. Income...

Wp/32160/2023 Of Sridhar Kagne v. Income Tax Officer

High Court 22 Nov 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/32160/2023 Of Sridhar Kagne v. Income Tax Officer
Date of order
22 Nov 2023
Assessment year(s)
2015-16
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp/32160/2023 Of Sridhar Kagne v. Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2023) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view of the same, we are [inclined ][to ][allow ][the ][present ][writ] petition also on similar terms.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 32160 OF 2023 Between: Sridhar Kagne, S/o: lVlahadev Kagne, Agg_d about 44 yearc, Occ. PrivateEmployee, Ryo Plot No.76, 77, F.No.302,3'o Floor, Sardar Patel Nagar, SaiNagar, Beside DT.KKR Gowtham School, Hydernagar, RangaReddyTelangana-500085. ...PETITIONER AND 1lncome Tax Officer, Ward-l, Warangal, D.No.1-8-610, 3'd Floor, MayuriComplex, Opposite to TSNPDCL Bhavan, Nakkalagutta, Hanmakonda,Warangal.Complex, Opposite to TSNPDCL Bhavan, Nakkalagutta, Hanmakonda,Warangal. 2National Faceless Assessment Centre, Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Lane,Barakhamba, New Delhi-110001. Rep. by its Assessment OfficerBarakhamba, New Delhi-110001. Rep. by its Assessment Officer 3. Union Bank of lndia, Shankarpalli. Branch, 1't Floor, Grampanchayat Bhavan,Shankarpalli, Ranga Reddy Districts01203. Rep. by its Branch lvlanagerShankarpalli, Ranga Reddy Districts01203. Rep. by its Branch lvlanager ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol 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 pa(icularly in the nature of a Writof Certiorari, calling for records and [quashing ]the order under Section [1a8A(d) ][of]the lncome Tax Act, 196'l dated 2410412022 for the Assessment [Year ][201 ][5-16]issued with DIN ITBA/AST lFl148A12022-2311042833155('l ), and [consequently ][set]aside the notice under Section 148 of the lT Act dated [2510412022 ][for ] [201 ][5-16]with Dl N I TBA/AST/S/1 48 1 I 2022-231 [1 ]042834437 [(1 ]). lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased todispense with the filing of the original order under Section 148A(d) of the lncomeTax Act, 1961 dated 2410412022 for the Assessment Year 2O15-16 issued with DINITBA/AST/F/I48A12022-2311042833155(1), and the notice under Section 148 ofthe lT Act daled 2510412022 for AY 2015-16 with DIN ITBA/AST/S/148-112O22-23t1042834437(1r,. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stayall further proceedings consequent to the issuance of notice under Section 148 ofthe lT Act dated 251O412022 for assessment year 2015-16 in the circumstances ofthe case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KAILASH NATH P S S Counsel for the Respondents: J V PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI{ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.3216O OF 2023 ORDER (per Hon'bte Sn Justice P.SAM [KOSHtf)] When the matter is taken up for hearing [today, ][it ][has ][been] informed by the parties that an identical [Writ ][Petition ][i.e.,]W.P.No.3O153 of 2023 has already been allowed [and ][disposed of]uide order , dated 30. 1O.2023. 2. [n vieu, of the fact that the identical [matter ][has already ][been]alloned by this Court, we are inclined to allow this [Writ ][Petition]in terms o[ the order passed in W.P.No.30153 [of ][2023 ][decided ][on]30.1O.2023 on similar terms. 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications [pending ]if [any ][in ][this]Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. SD/. T. JAYASREEASSTSTANT RFGTtfRAR//TRUE COPY//,VJSECTION OFFICER To, 1.lncome Tax Officer, Ward-|, Warangal, D.No.1-8-610, 3rd Floor, Mayuri ORDER (per Hon'bte Sn Justice P.SAM [KOSHtf)] When the matter is taken up for hearing [today, ][it ][has ][been] informed by the parties that an identical [Writ ][Petition ][i.e.,]W.P.No.3O153 of 2023 has already been allowed [and ][disposed of]uide order , dated 30. 1O.2023. 2. [n vieu, of the fact that the identical [matter ][has already ][been]alloned by this Court, we are inclined to allow this [Writ ][Petition]in terms o[ the order passed in W.P.No.30153 [of ][2023 ][decided ][on]30.1O.2023 on similar terms. 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications [pending ]if [any ][in ][this]Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. SD/. T. JAYASREEASSTSTANT RFGTtfRAR//TRUE COPY//,VJSECTION OFFICER To, 1.lncome Tax Officer, Ward-|, Warangal, D.No.1-8-610, 3rd Floor, Mayuri Complex, Opposite to TSNPDCL Bhavan, Nakkalagutta, Hanmakonda,Warangal.Warangal.2.The Assessment Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lvlayurBhawan, Connaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi-1 10001.Bhawan, Connaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi-1 10001.J.Union Bank of tndia, Shankarpalli. Branch, 1st Floor, Grampanchayat Bhavan, Shankarpalli, Ranga Reddy District-S01203. Rep. by its Branch Manager4.One CC to Sri Kailash Nath P S S, Advocate 5,One CC to Sri J V Prasad (SC for lncome Tax) 6.Two CD Copies6.Two CD CopiesTJGJPGJP BN(Along with the Order Copy dt:30.10.2023 in W.P.No.30153 of 2023) HIGH COURT DATED:2211112023 ORDER WP.No.32160 ot 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS. O [oy,^] B^,gtl,rl*-s s L.1 r€\o),')2 [E[ 2023\.j.D THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LN(MI NARAYANA w.P. No. 30153 of 2o23 ORDER:per Ao n'ble Sri .luslicc [P.SAM ][KOSHY)] Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned [counsel ][for ][the]petitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing [Counsel]for Income Tax appearing for the [respondents. ][Perused ][the ][entire]record. 2. The instant petition has been [{iled ][challenging ][the ][Assessment]Order passed by respondent [No.1 ][under ][section ][148A(d) ][ofthe ][Income]Tax Act, 196 1 (hereinafter [referred ]to [as ]["the ][Act") dated ][25.04 ][.2022]for the Assessment Year 20 [f ]8- [9.] 3. One of the contentions that [the ][petitioner has raised ][in ][the]present writ petition is that under the [amended provisions ][of the ][Act]which came into effect from [0 ][1 ][.04.202 ][1, the ][respondents ][while]proceeding under Section 148 of the [Act ][were ][required ][to ][issue notice]under Section 148A and [provide ][an ][opportunity ][of ][hearing ][to ][the]assessee. As [per ]the [amended ][provision ][of ][law, the ][proceedings ][to ][be]drawn are also in [a ][faceless ][manner. ][Whereas, ][it ][has ][been contended]by the petitioner that in [the ][instant ][case, ][reopening ][has been ][initiated]by the Juridictional Assessing [Officer. ][In ][respect ][of the said objection]that the petitioner [had ][raised, he relied ][upon the ][recent ][batch ][of ][writ] petitions decided by this [very ][Bench ][on ][14 ]['Og ]'2023 [vide]W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 [and batch ][to ][the ][limited ][extent'] 4. Learned counsel for the [Department ][would ][not ][dispute ][of]having decided the said [objection ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][matters']However, learned counsel submits [that ][apart from ][the ][aforesaid]objection, there have been other [various ][objections also ][which ][the]petitioner has raised in the writ [petition'] So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of ][the ][learned ][counsel ]][[the ][learned ][counsel ]][[learned ][counsel ]][[counsel ]][[for ][the]][[the]] petitions decided by this [very ][Bench ][on ][14 ]['Og ]'2023 [vide]W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 [and batch ][to ][the ][limited ][extent'] 4. Learned counsel for the [Department ][would ][not ][dispute ][of]having decided the said [objection ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][matters']However, learned counsel submits [that ][apart from ][the ][aforesaid]objection, there have been other [various ][objections also ][which ][the]petitioner has raised in the writ [petition'] So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of ][the ][learned ][counsel ]][[the ][learned ][counsel ]][[learned ][counsel ]][[counsel ]][[for ][the]][[the]] 5. So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of ][the ][learned ][counsel ]][[the ][learned ][counsel ]][[learned ][counsel ]][[counsel ]][[for ][the]][[the]]Department1Sconcerned, this Bench, while [disposing ][of]W.P.No.25903of 2022 and batch had taken [note ][of the ][same ][in]paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which [is reproduced herein under:] "37. Tine preliminary objection [raised ][by ][the ][petitioner ][is]sustained and all these writ [petitions ][stands ][allowed ][on ][this ][very]jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices [and ][orders ][are]getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, [we are ][not inclined ][to]proceJd 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 Hontrle [Supreme ][Court had, ][in ][the ][case of ][Ashish]Agarwal, supra, as a one-time [measure ][exercising ][the ][powers]under Article 142 of the Constitution [of ][India, ][permitted ][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 ][reserved ][to ][proceed]further if they so want from the [stage of ][the order of the ][Supreme]Court in the case ofAshish [Agarwal, ][supra.] 6. In view of the same, we are [inclined ][to ][allow ][the ][present ][writ] petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, [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.] As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid [batch ][matters, ][the]right of the respondents would stand reserved as is [envisaged ][in]paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said batch. No order as to costs. 7 . Consequently, miscellaneous petitions [pending, ]if [any, ][shall]stand closed. P.SAM KOSHY, J Dated: 30.lO.2023aqs LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYAND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No. 30153 of 2O2g $ter [the ][Hon'ble ][Sri ][Justice ][P.SAM ][KOSHY)] oqs Dated: 30. 10.2023
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan