Wp/3791/2024 Of Primary Agriculture Co- Operative Society Limited v. Office Of The Income Tax Officer Ward- 2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE [P.SAM KOSHY]ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRt JUSTICE [N.TUKARAMJI] WRIT PETITIO N NO:3791 OF [2024] Between: Primary Agriculture Co- Operative [Society Limited, ][Rep ].by-i!9 [Secretary Jajala]Snetai Sl"o Chinnaiah Kalleda [Kalleda ][Vill ][and Jagityal ][lvldl Karimnagar ][Dist]505454, Telangana, Assessment [Year201B- ][19 ] ...'ET,T.ONER AND 1. Office Of The lncome Tax Officer [Ward- 2, Karimnagar Telangana State']2. The Principal Chief Commissioner [of ][lncome Tax ][- ][Telangana ]44^?'Hyderabail, lT Towers, AC Guards, [IVlasab ][Tank, ][Hyderabad ][- ][500 ][028']Telangana.2. The Principal Chief Commissioner [of ][lncome Tax ][- ][Telangana ]44^?'Hyderabail, lT Towers, AC Guards, [IVlasab ][Tank, ][Hyderabad ][- ][500 ][028']Telangana. 3. The C"entral Board of Direct [Taxes, Represented ][by ][its Chairman, Department]of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, [Government ][of ][lndia, Secretariat ][Buildings,]New Delhi - 110 001 [[.]]of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, [Government ][of ][lndia, Secretariat ][Buildings,]New Delhi - 110 001 [[.]] 4. The National Faceless Assessment [[.]][Center, lncome ][Tax ][Department, ][New]Delhi.Delhi. 5. The Union of lndia, Represented [by ][its ][Secretary ][to ][the ][Government']Department of Revenub, tiilinistry [of ][Finance, New Delhi ][- ]['l ][10 ][001 ][.]Department of Revenub, tiilinistry [of ][Finance, New Delhi ][- ]['l ][10 ][001 ][.] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution [of ][India ][praying ][that ][in ][the]circumslances 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 [order ][passed ][by ][the ][lncome ][Tax]Authorities (National Faceless E- Assessment [centre ][completed ][the ][assessment]US 147 r/w Sectron 144- B of the [lncome Tax ][Act, ][1961 ][vide ] [and ][Notice ][No']dated l5- O1- 2024 in ITBA/AST/S/14712023- [2411059712312('l ]) [for ][the]assessment year 2018' ['19 ]determining [the total ][income ][of ][Rs. ][18,51,845 ][- ][as]arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, without [jurisdiction, void- ][ab- ][initio, ][violative ][of ][the]principles of natural justice apart from being [violative ]of [Articles ][1 ]' [19(1)( ][g ]) [and] 265 of the Constitutiorl of lndia and Sec. 14BA of the lncome Tax Act, ['1961. ]andconsequently set aside the same in the interests of Justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit frled in support of the [petition, ]the High Court may be pleased tosuspend the order Under Section 144- B of the lncome Tax Act, ['1961 ]vide DINand Notice No dated 15- 01- 2024 in ITBA/AST/S/14712023- 2411059712312(1)for the assessment year 2018- 19 determining the total income of Rs. ['18,51,8451]and order and Demand notice u/s 1 56 of the lncome Tax act 1961 vide DIN and, Notice No ITBA/AST/S/1 5612023- 2411059712357(1)Dt 15- 01- 2024fot theassessment year 2018- ['19 ]notice Under Section 148- A, (b) Dt. 23- O3-2O22,|TBA/AST/F/'148A (SCNy2021- 22 11041376177(1), 148 A(d) Dt 07- 04- 2022 inITBA/AST/F/148A12022- 2311042634945(1)and notice under section 148 Dt 07-04- 2022 in ITBA/AST/S 1148 112022- 2311042646836 (1) for the Assessment Year2018- 19, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMARCounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SRI SUNDARI R PISUPATI, Sr SC forlncome Tax DeptCounsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE N.TUKARAMJIWRIT PETITION No.3791 OF 2o24 ORDER:lper Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMARCounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: SRI SUNDARI R PISUPATI, Sr SC forlncome Tax DeptCounsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE N.TUKARAMJIWRIT PETITION No.3791 OF 2o24 ORDER:lper Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by thepetitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following relief: "to i-ssue an appropiate writ order or direction moreparticularlg one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaingthe order po-ssed bg the Income Tox Authoities NationalFaceless E Assessment Centre completed the ossessment US147 r/u Section 144 B of the Income Tax Act 1961 uide DINond Notice No dated 15 Oi 2024 in ITBA/ AST/ S/ 147/202324/ 1059712312(1) for the ossessment year 2018 19determining the total income of Rs.18,51,845/ - as arbitraryillegal bad in lau.t tuithout jurbdiction uoid ab initio uiolatiueof the principles of natural justice apaft from betng uiolatiueof Articles 14 191 g and 265 of the Constitution of India andSec 148A of the Income Tox Act 1961 and consequentlA setoside the same in the interests of justice". 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act which came into effect fromO | .O4 .2021 , the respondents, while proceeding underSection 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under =-!__\ PSK,J& MTR,JW.P.No.3797 of 2O24 Section 14BA and provide an opportunity of-hearing to theassessee. 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 Jurisdictiona-l Assessing Offrcer. 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 the 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 rn the writpetition 5. So far as this contention of the learned counsel forthe respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, whiledisposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note of "-,r " [.tT+.F5{] the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: 37. Tfie preliminary objection raised by tLrc petitrcneris sustoined and all these urit petifions sfonds alloutedon this uery [jurisdictional ]issue. Since th.e impugnednotices and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjuri.sdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further anddecide the other issues raised bg the petitioner uthichstands reserued to be raised and contended in anop p rop iate proce e ding s. " "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the caseof Ashish Aganual, supra, as a one-time measureexercising th.e pou.ters under Article 142 of theConstitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceedunder the substituted prouisions, and this Courtallouting the petitions only on the procedural Jlau, theight confered on the Reuenue uould remoin reseruedto proceed further if theg so uant from the stage of theorder of the Supreme Court in tlrc case of AshishAganual, supra. " 6. In view of the same, we a-re 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 "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the caseof Ashish Aganual, supra, as a one-time measureexercising th.e pou.ters under Article 142 of theConstitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceedunder the substituted prouisions, and this Courtallouting the petitions only on the procedural Jlau, theight confered on the Reuenue uould remoin reseruedto proceed further if theg so uant from the stage of theorder of the Supreme Court in tlrc case of AshishAganual, supra. " 6. In view of the same, we a-re 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 aJoresaid batchmatters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as ismatters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is =--- \ PSK,J & MTR,JW.P.No.3797 of 2O24 envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said orderpassed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs.Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending. if any,passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs.Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending. if any, shall stand closed SD/- K.SREERAMA ASSISTANT REGISIRARw //TRUE COPY' SECTION To 1. Office Of The lncome lax Oflicer Ward- 2' Kanmnagar Telanqana State2. The Principal [Chief ][co'iiition"t ][oi ][lncome Tax ][- Telanoana= ][and ] [P']ianrt [Hvdera-bad ][- ][s00 028'] 1. Office Of The lncome lax Oflicer Ward- 2' Kanmnagar Telanqana State2. The Principal [Chief ][co'iiition"t ][oi ][lncome Tax ][- Telanoana= ][and ] [P']ianrt [Hvdera-bad ][- ][s00 028']it'i;tau Hyderabad, [lr ][rowers ]"i'i;"'";;'t' "i'i;"'";;'t' Telanqana. Telanqana.3. il;'ii;i;ran' [Central Board of ][Direct ][Taxes' ][Department of Revenue']Buildings' [New ][Delhi ][-]Buildings' [New ][Delhi ][-]Ministry of [Finance, ]"o"#'i""ntiii'iii'ls"i'"t'iiat [[New]]"o"#'i""ntiii'iii'ls"i'"t'iiat [[New]] o. +LgRT."rl [Faceless Assessment ][center' ][lncome ][Tax ][Department' ][[New]] . " ?frIL""r",rrv rrriin'i.t* oi Fifirn"", to [the Government' ]New Delhi - 1 10 [Unron ]001[of ][lndia' ][Department of Revenue'][[Advocate ]][[toPUCl]][[Advocate ]][[toPUCl]] rrriin'i.t* 6 one cC to [[sRl ][THANNifrJ ]][[THANNifrJ ]][inArr-nNV4 ][(u.y.Al' ][[Advocate ]][[toPUCl]][[sr_sb tgltncome lax-Dept ]][[sr_sb tgltncome lax-Dept ]] one cC to to [[sRl ][THANNifrJ ]][[THANNifrJ ]]7 one cc to sRt [suNronn'r'H ][Fisup;\ir, ][[sr_sb tgltncome lax-Dept ]][IoPUCI]8. one cc [to SRt ][cnor ][ph'nueeijiuiiAR, ][oy. ][sortctroR ] [oF]rNDIA 8. one cc [to SRt ][cnor ][ph'nueeijiuiiAR, ][oy. ][sortctroR ] [oF]rNDIA ITwo CD CoPies I PSK. G.IP $ -.4:.:.a"fr.:! HIGH COURT DATED:1410212024 ORDER WP.No.3791 of [2024] ALLOWING WITHOUT COSTS. (Eo{.t *' --a t I [lrin ]['i'i;]