Wp/5303/2009 Of M/S. Sree Rayalaseema Green Energy Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENTTHE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 5303 of 2009 Between: M/s. Sree Rayalaseema Green Energy Limited, Pandipadu Road,Laxmipuram, Kurnool, Kurnool district, Rep. by its Managing Director, K. Madhusudan, S/o. K.Padmanabhaiah Setty, Aged 41 Years. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Hyderabad. 3 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to to issue a Writ, order or direction one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the notice of the 1st respondent, Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Central), Hyderabad, in F.No. CIT(C)H/263(2)/08-09, dated17-02-2009 issued u/sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the blockperiod 1996-97 to 2001-02 and upto 07-03-2002 as bad in law, arbitraryand violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, set aside the same andpass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.V.KRISHNA KOUNDINYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.J.V.PRASAD (SC FOR INCOMETAX) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5303 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) The petitioner has challenged the show cause notice dated17.2.2009 issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),Hyderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that the authority who has issuedthe show cause notice is not having jurisdiction in the facts stated inthe affidavit supporting the petition. Several legal issues have beenraised in the petition and it is also an admitted fact that a reply to theshow cause notice has been given by the petitioner on 5.3.2009. Looking to the fact that a show cause notice has beenchallenged in this petition, we do not entertain the petition. We aresure that the authority concerned shall look into the contents of thereply dated 5.3.2009 filed by the petitioner and decide the matterobjectively. If the authority decides against the petitioner, the order whichmight be passed, should not be implemented for a period of threeweeks from the date of its communication to the petitioner. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we do not grant therelief prayed for. Subject to the direction given to the authority, the petition is rejected with no order as to costs. ___________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 17[th ]March, 2009asp _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J