Wp/3790/2024 Of Siripuram Rama Krishna v. The Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P,SAM KOSHYAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 3790 OF 2024 Between: Siripuram Rama Krishna, S/o, Siripuram Venkataiah, aged 44 years, Occ ; Business,R/o.H.No.9-l-3411517|a, Bapu Nagar, Golconda S.0, GotConda, HYDERABAD,50000B, Telangana, INDIA PAN. Assessment Year. 2015-16. .....PETITIONER AND 1. The lncome Tax Officer, WARD 14(1), l.T Towers, A.C. Guards Masab Tank,HYDERABAD, Telangana, 500001.HYDERABAD, Telangana, 500001. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, AP and TS, 1Oth Floor,C-Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.C-Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 3. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 ['10003.]Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 ['10003.] .....RESPONOENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned order for A.Y. 2015-'16passed uls 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 1448 ol the lncome-tax Act videITBA/AST/S/14712023-2411059718314(1) dated 15-01-2O24and theconsequential notice u/s ['148 ]dated 1B-O4-2O22 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl148-112022- 2311042754954(1)issued by the JA0(1St respondent) instead of FA0(3rdrespondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act andcontrary to the principles of natural justice. |.A.NO:1 OF 2024 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased tostay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice u/s 148 dt. 18-04-2022 videDIN No. ITBA/AST/S/1 48112022-2311042754954(1) issued by the ['1st]Respondent (JAO) for A.Y 2015-16 instead of 3'd respondent (FAO), and maypass such other order(s) as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in theinterests of substantial [justice, ]as otherwise the Petitioner would be [put ]toirreparable loss and severe injury. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : SRI J.V.PRASAD [(SC ]FOR INCOME TAX)The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE [P.SAM ] AND THE HONOURABLE [N.TUI(ARAMJI]WRIT PETITION[No.379O][oF ][2024] ORDER:(per [Ho ][n'ble ][Si ][Justice P.SAM KOSHII)] The instant Writ [Petition ][has ][been ][filed ][by ][the] petitioner under Articl e 226 [of the ][Constitution ][of ][India]seeking for the following [reliel] "to issue an appropiate [tuit ][order ][or ][direction ][more]particulortg one [in- ]thi [noture ][of ][Wit ][of Mandamus ][declaing]'the impugied ord.er for A Y 2o1516passed u/s 747 r w s144 reoi uith section [1448 ][of ][the ][Income ][tox ][Act ][uide]ITBA/ AST/ S/ 147/ [202324/ ][10597183141 ][dt ] [5o12o24and]the consequential [notice ][u/s ][148 ][dt ][18042022 ][uide ] [No]I\BA/ ASTT S/ 1481/ 2022 [23/ 10427549541issued ][bs ][the]JA}1S1 respond-ent [instead ][of ][FAO3rd' ][respond'ent ][as ][uoid]iltegat and-contrary to [the ][proui-sio-ns ][of ].Income [tox ][Act ][ond].oit ory to the Pinciptes [of Natural ][Justice" ]['] The instant Writ [Petition ][has ][been ][filed ][by ][the] petitioner under Articl e 226 [of the ][Constitution ][of ][India]seeking for the following [reliel] "to issue an appropiate [tuit ][order ][or ][direction ][more]particulortg one [in- ]thi [noture ][of ][Wit ][of Mandamus ][declaing]'the impugied ord.er for A Y 2o1516passed u/s 747 r w s144 reoi uith section [1448 ][of ][the ][Income ][tox ][Act ][uide]ITBA/ AST/ S/ 147/ [202324/ ][10597183141 ][dt ] [5o12o24and]the consequential [notice ][u/s ][148 ][dt ][18042022 ][uide ] [No]I\BA/ ASTT S/ 1481/ 2022 [23/ 10427549541issued ][bs ][the]JA}1S1 respond-ent [instead ][of ][FAO3rd' ][respond'ent ][as ][uoid]iltegat and-contrary to [the ][proui-sio-ns ][of ].Income [tox ][Act ][ond].oit ory to the Pinciptes [of Natural ][Justice" ]['] 2. One of the contentions [that ][the petitioner ][has ][raised]in the present [Writ ][Petition ][is ][that ][under ][the ][amended]of the Act [which ][carne ][into ][effect ][from]provisions Ol.O4.2O2l, 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, theproceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. 3. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitionercontended that, in the instant case, reopening has beeninitiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. In supportof his contention, he relied upon the recent judgmentrendered by this very Bench in WP.No.25903 of 2022 &batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of thebatch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for therespondent Department does not dispute that Lhe saidobjection was decided in the aforesaid batch of WritPetitions. However, he further contended that apart fromthe aforesaid objection, there have been other variousobjections also which the petitioner has raised in the writpetition. 5. So far as this contention of the learned counsel forthe respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, whiledisposing of said batch of '"vrit petitions, had taken note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are [reproduced] herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised bg the [petitioner]is sustained and all these writ petitions stands allouedon this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugnednotices and orders are getting quashed on the [point ]ofjurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further anddecide the otLer issues raised bg the petitioner uhichstrznds reserued to be raised and contended in an"ap prop iate pro ceeding s. "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tLrc caseof Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time measureexercising the pouters under Article 142 of theConstitution of India, permitted tlrc Reuenue to [proceed]under the substituted prouisions, and this Courtallowing the petitions only on the procedural ftaw, theright confened on the Reuenue utould remain reseruedto proceed further if they so u.tont from the stage of theorder of the Supreme Court in tLte case of AshishAga ru.tal, supra." 6. In 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 inaccordance 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 reserved as is 4PSK,J& [NTR,J]W.P,No.379O [of ][2O24] envisaged [at ][paragraph ][Nos'37 ][& ][38 ][of ][the ][said ][order] No [order as ][to ][costs][pending, ][if ][anY']petitions passed [in ][the batch ][of ][writ ][petitions] ConsequentlY, [miscellaneous] shall [stand ][closed'] RISD/. [HD. ] ASSISTAN //TRUE SECTION HIGH COURT DATED:1410212024 ORDERWP.No.3790 of 2024 7. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batchmatters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is 4PSK,J& [NTR,J]W.P,No.379O [of ][2O24] envisaged [at ][paragraph ][Nos'37 ][& ][38 ][of ][the ][said ][order] No [order as ][to ][costs][pending, ][if ][anY']petitions passed [in ][the batch ][of ][writ ][petitions] ConsequentlY, [miscellaneous] shall [stand ][closed'] RISD/. [HD. ] ASSISTAN //TRUE SECTION HIGH COURT DATED:1410212024 ORDERWP.No.3790 of 2024 ALLOWING THE [W.P]WITHOUT COSTS. w G('* 1[gE ] 6,(_t,t:1i0 2 APn 2024.?-*O5spr.tcH