Wp/34539/2023 Of Mr. Madharshab Qureshi v. Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [P.SAM KOSHY]AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRlT PETITION NO: 34539 OF [2023] Between: Mr. Madharshab Qureshi, # [1-89, Ameenpur Villege, Ameenpur ][Patancheru]Mandal, Medak 502032 ...PETITIONER AND 1lncome Tax Officer, Ward [1, ][lncome Tax ][Office, ][Veerabhadra Nagar, ][New]Bus Stand, Sangareddy, [Andhra Pradesh,502001]Bus Stand, Sangareddy, [Andhra Pradesh,502001] 2The Principal Chief Commissioner [of lncome ][Tax AP AND ][TS, ][lOth Floor' ] Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, [A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004]Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, [A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004] 3The Assessment Unit, lncome [Tax Department' ][National ][Faceles^q]Assessment Centre, Delhi, [tr/inistry ][of Finance, ][Room ][No. 4O1' ][2'- ][Floor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi-110003]Assessment Centre, Delhi, [tr/inistry ][of Finance, ][Room ][No. 4O1' ][2'- ][Floor, ] Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, [Delhi-110003] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article [226 ][of ][the ][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 ][in ][the]nature of writ of Mandamus, [declaring ][the ][impugned order dt.18/04/2022 ][passed]u/s l BA(d) of the Act [vide ] [No. ][ITBA/AST/F|148A|2O22 ][- ][2311042763485(1)]and the consequential [notice ][u/s ][148 ][dl.18lO4l2O22 ][vide ] [No. ] - 1t2)22-23t1}42163g12(1), [for A.Y. 2015-16, issued ][by ][the ][JAO(1't ][respondent)]instead of FA0(3d respondent), [as void, illegal, and ][contrary ][to the ][provisions ][of]lncome{ax Act and contrary [to ][the ][Principles ][of ][Natural Justice'] IA NO: 10 [2023] Petition [under Section ][151 ] [praying ][that ][in ][the ][circumstances ][stated ][in]the affidavit [filed in ][support ][of ][the petition' the High Court may be ][pleased ][to ][stay]all further [proceedings pursuant ][to ][the notice ][u/s ][148 dt'18l}4t2O22of ][the ][Act ][vide]1'tITBA/AST/S/14 [8-1t2o22- ][23 ]t1042763g12 [(1)issued ][by the ]Respondent(JAO)for [A.Y. 2015-16 instead ][of ][3'd ][respondent(FAO)'] Counsel [for ][the ][Petitioner: ] Counsel [for the Respondents: ] (Sr SC for lncome [Tax ][DePt)] The Court [made ][the ][following: ] THE HONOURABLE SRI [P.SAM KOSHY]ANDTHE HONOURABLE WRIT PETITION[No.34539 ] [2o23] ORDER[(per ]Hon'ble [Sri ][Justice P.SAM ][KOSHY)] 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 [3O.1O.2023.] 2.InviewofthefactthattheidenticalmatterhasalreadybeenallowedbythisCourt,weareinclinedtoallowthisWritPetitioninterms of the order [passed ][in ][W.P'No'3O ][153 ][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 ][ciosed. ][No ][order ][as ][to ][costs'] SD/. [K.S] TSTRARASSI /ITRUE FFICERSECTTON To, 1m6. Two [CoPtes] TJGJ (Along \v (Along [with ][the Order Copy dt:30'10' ][2023 ][inW'P'No'30153 ][ol ][2023\] HIGH COURT DATED:2211212023 ORDER WP.No.34539 ot 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS ,ht) 1HE S14B(o(oo0 [g ],!A1\l 202f.4t*DFsPATCHgO THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTYW.P. No. 3O153 of 2O23 3. As a sequel, [miscellaneous applications pending ][if ][any ][in ][this]Writ Petition, shall [stand ][ciosed. ][No ][order ][as ][to ][costs'] SD/. [K.S] TSTRARASSI /ITRUE FFICERSECTTON To, 1m6. Two [CoPtes] TJGJ (Along \v (Along [with ][the Order Copy dt:30'10' ][2023 ][inW'P'No'30153 ][ol ][2023\] HIGH COURT DATED:2211212023 ORDER WP.No.34539 ot 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS ,ht) 1HE S14B(o(oo0 [g ],!A1\l 202f.4t*DFsPATCHgO THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTYW.P. No. 3O153 of 2O23 ORDER:per ao n'ble St: Jusuce P.SAM Kosr:f:) Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for thepetitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counselfor Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entirerecord. 2. The instant petition has been filed challenging the AssessmentOrder passed by respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 25.04.2022for the Assessment Year 20 18- 19. 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 O 1.O4.202 1, the respondents whileproceeding under Section 148 of the Act were required to issue noticeunder Section 148A and provide an opportunit5r 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 writ petitions decided by this very Bench on 14.Og .2023 videW.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch to the limited extent. 4. Learned counsel for the Department would not dispute ofhaving decided the said objection in the aforesaid batch matters.However, learned counsel submits that apart from the aforesaidobjection, there have been other various objections also which thepetitioner has raised in the writ petil ion. 5. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for theDepartment is concerned, this Bench, while disposing ofW.P.No.25903 of 2022 and batch had taken note of the same inparagraph Nos.37 & 38 which is reproduced herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is:":t1,""9 [and ][all ][these ][writ ][petitions ][stands allowed ][on this ][very]jurisdictionat issue. Since the impugned notices and orders aregetting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we are not inclined toproceed further and decide the other issues raised by thepetitioner which stands reserved to be raised and contended in anappropriate proceedings." 38. Since the Honble Supreme Court had, in the case ofAshishAgarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powersunder Article I42 of the Constitution of tfreIndia, [ermlttea Revenue to proceed under the substituted provisibns, and thisCourt allowing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the rightconferred on the Revenue would remain reserved to proceedfurther if they so want from the stage of the order of the SupremeCourt in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writpetition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ petitionstands allowed on the objection of the petitioner that the proceedingshave not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision butunder the unamended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. ,1 As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, theright of the respondents would stand reserved as is envisaged inparagraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said batch. No order as to costs. 7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallstand closed. P.SAM KOSHY, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dated:3O.iO.2O23aqs