Wp/3938/2024 Of M/S. Sreehari Wines v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 3938 0F 2024 Between: M/s' sreehari w ines. 4-6-6.2.NACHARAM, H'DERABAD 500076,Terangana, RepBy. Partne(J. Nageswara Rao) ...PETITIONER AND 1lncome Tax Officer. Ward 15(1 ), I T Tower, AC Guards, Masab Tank,Hyderabad - 500004.Hyderabad - 500004.2Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax 4, 1Oth Floor, C-Block, l.T. Towers,1 0-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-5000041 0-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004 3. National Faceless Assessment Centre, The Assessment Unit, lncome TaxDepartment, Nationar Faceress AisdssmLnt'"Gntre, Derhi, Ministrv ofFinance, Room No. 4o1, 2nd Ftooi-Ei;;;, Jr"*l[irur'iviih,il"Silli;:Delhi-1 10003National Faceless Assessment Centre, The Assessment Unit, lncome TaxDepartment, Nationar Faceress AisdssmLnt'"Gntre, Derhi, Ministrv ofFinance, Room No. 4o1, 2nd Ftooi-Ei;;;, Jr"*l[irur'iviih,il"Silli;:Delhi-1 10003 4' Pr. commissioner of rncome Tax- 4, 1Oth Froor, c-Brock, r.T. Towers, 10-2-3,A.G. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.A.G. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 5. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment.Centre, Delhi. Ministry_of Flnanc-iRooin f.fo.'+ti-, ZnO Fffi, E:Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,belhi-1 iOOOb''--Assessment.Centre, Delhi. Ministry_of Flnanc-iRooin f.fo.'+ti-, ZnO Fffi, E:Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,belhi-1 iOOOb''-- ...RESPONDENTS Petition undei Articre 226 0f the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may bepleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one inthe nature of writ of Mandamus, decraring the impugned order dt.23.04.2022 torA.Y. 2018-19 passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act vide DtN No. |rBA/AST/Ft148N2022_2311042829414(1 )(Exhibit p-1 ) and the consequentiar notice u/s 148 dt.23.04.2022 vide DrN No. |rEA/AST/sr14B-1/2022- 23r1o42830s14(1), issued by the JAO(1st respondeht) instead of FAo (3rd respondent),as void, iflegar, andcontrary to the provisions of rncome-tax Act and contrary to the principres ofNatural Justice. lA NO: 1 oF 2024 Petition under section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stayall further proceedings pursuant to the notice uls 14g dt. 23.o4.2022 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST tgt14B_1t2O22- 23t 1042830514(1)issued by the 1stRespondbnt(JAO)for A.y. 2018-lginstead of 3rd respondent(FAO), and may passsuch other order(s) as the Hon'bre court deems fit and proper in the interests ofsubstantial justice, as otherwise the petitioner wourd be put to irreparabre rossand severe injury. Counsel for the [petitioner: ]SRI MANMOHAN DUNDU Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V.PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the foflowing: ORDER i I i I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No. 393a oF 2024 ORDER:@erHon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHfl) The instant Writ Petition has been filed theby petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following reliet "...to issue an appropriate writ, order, or directionmore particularly one in the nature of writ ofmandamus declaring the impugned order, dated23.04.2022 for A.Y. 2018-19 passed under Sectionl48A(d) of the Act, vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/ F /148A/2022-23/1O428294L4(tl and the consequentialnoLice under Section 148, dated 23.04.2022 vid,eDIN No.ITBA/AST/ S / 148_L /2022-23 / to4283osl4(l) issued by the JAO (1"t respondent) instead ofFAO 13'a respondent) as void, illegal, and contra-ryto the provisions of Income Tax Act and contrary tottre kinciples of Natural Justice and pass.. ." 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised The instant Writ Petition has been filed theby petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following reliet "...to issue an appropriate writ, order, or directionmore particularly one in the nature of writ ofmandamus declaring the impugned order, dated23.04.2022 for A.Y. 2018-19 passed under Sectionl48A(d) of the Act, vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/ F /148A/2022-23/1O428294L4(tl and the consequentialnoLice under Section 148, dated 23.04.2022 vid,eDIN No.ITBA/AST/ S / 148_L /2022-23 / to4283osl4(l) issued by the JAO (1"t respondent) instead ofFAO 13'a respondent) as void, illegal, and contra-ryto the provisions of Income Tax Act and contrary tottre kinciples of Natural Justice and pass.. ." 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amendedprovisions of tl.e Act which cEune into effect from01.O4.2O2I, the respondents, while proceeding underSection 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 [aw, theproceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, learned counsel for the for the petitioner 3. Whereas, learned counsel for the 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 [judgment]rendered by this very Bench in WP.No.259O3 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 in the writpetition. 5. So far as this contention of the leamed counsel forthe respondent-Department is concerned, tltis Bench, whiledispsing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note of \ the same at [paragraph Nos'37 ][& ][38 which ][are reproduced] herein under: "37. TIE [preliminary ][objection ][raised bg ][the ][petitioner]ii ';;br" and atltheie wit [petitions stands ][alloued]""ttirna jurisdictionat issue' [Since ][tLe ][impugted]noties ani ";rA [irders ][ore getting ][qtasled ][on ][the ][point ][of]we are [notlncliied ][to ][proceed ]furtler [and]iiii.ii.", 'i"Ji"ii'.rt*r isszes raised [bg ][the ][petitioner ][uhich].tii" ,.""-ed. to be [rabed ][and ][contended ][in ][on]appropiate Pro [ceeding ][s. ]["] "38. Sine [the ][Hon'ble ][Supreme ][Court ][had' ][in ][tle ][case]of Ashish [Agarutal, ][supra' ][as ][a ][one-time ]tie [pouters ][under ][Article ][142 ]-meosure[of ][the]Jxercbing iiiidrii"" [o7 ][tid;a, ][permitted ][the Reuenue ][to ][proceed]** iubstitu{ed [prouisiotts, ][and ][this ][court]"ili ilo [p"tition" ][only on ][tte ][proccdural ][flau' ][tle]it iirg iru i"f.o"a [on ][tle ][Reienue ][raould remain ][reserued]tX ir.*ii inler [if ][they ][so ][want ][from ][ttLe ][stag-e ]-of [the]lrilr-ii-ti supieme- Court [in ][the ][case ][of ][Ashish]Agarual, [suPra."] In view of view of of [[the ][same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[to ][allow ][the]][[allow ][the]][[the]] 6. In view of view of of [[the ][same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[to ][allow ][the]][[allow ][the]][[the]]writ [petition ][also ][on ][similar ][terms' Accordingly' ][the]present Writ [Petition ][stands allowed on ][the ][objection of ][the]present that [the ][proceedings ][have ][not ][been ][drawn ][in]petitioner accordance [with the ][amended ][provision ][but ][under ][the]un-amended [provision ][which is ][otherwise ][not sustainable'] 6. In view of view of of [[the ][same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[same, ][we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[we ][are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[are inclined ][to ][allow ][the]][[to ][allow ][the]][[allow ][the]][[the]]writ [petition ][also ][on ][similar ][terms' Accordingly' ][the]present Writ [Petition ][stands allowed on ][the ][objection of ][the]present that [the ][proceedings ][have ][not ][been ][drawn ][in]petitioner accordance [with the ][amended ][provision ][but ][under ][the]un-amended [provision ][which is ][otherwise ][not sustainable'] 7. As has been [held ][by ][this ][Bench ][in the ][aforesaid batch]matters, [the rights ][of ][the ][parties ][would ][stand ][reserved ][as ][is] PSK,J & .l\l:r&JW.P.No.3938 oJ 2O24 en\dsaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 8. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/.N. [S] ASSISTA //TRUE SECTION To,inr#ff#m;m+*,s*ffi ;rr*ffi:;nmm*ffil#*t*;#= BSKGJP w HIGH COURT DATED:1510212024 ORDER WP.No.3938 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS qft."\o&* (o\s[-(HI ][S14;]co(\(J2J nn nu**rl^TCHF-t)