Wp/5626/2024 Of Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited v. Office Of The Income Tax Officer Ward-2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYANOTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 5626 OF 2024 Between:PRIMARY AGRICULTURE [LIMITED,]Pegadapally,represented by its Secretary of [the ][Society, ][Thadakamadla]Gopal Reddy S/O Raji Reddy aged [49 ][years,Pegadapally ][Vill ][and ][Mdl']Karimnagar Dist 505531 , Telangana,lndia. [PAN. Assessment]Year' 2o18-19 ...PETrroNER AND 1 . Office Of The lncome Tax Officer [Ward-2, ][Karimnagar ][Telangana ][State.]2. The Principal Chief Commissioner [of ][lncome ][Tax ][Telangana ][qlq ]&?'Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, [Masab ][Tank, ][Hyderabad ][500 ][028']Telangana.2. The Principal Chief Commissioner [of ][lncome ][Tax ][Telangana ][qlq ]&?'Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, [Masab ][Tank, ][Hyderabad ][500 ][028']Telangana. 3. The Clntral 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. Delhi.5. The Union of lndia, [Represented ][by ][its ][Secretary ][to ][the ][Government,]Department of Revenue, Ministry [of ][Finance, ][New Delhi ][-"1 ][10 001.]Department of Revenue, Ministry [of ][Finance, ][New Delhi ][-"1 ][10 001.] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot [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]ihe nature of Writ of Mandamus, [declaring ][the ][subsequent notices issued ][by the](National Faceless E-Assessment Centre). [and ][the ][notice ][u/s ][148 ][Ol. ][19-04-2022]in ITBA/AST/St148 112022- 23t1042782430(1) [issued ][by ][the ][JAO(1st ][respondent)]instead of FAO(31 .d respondent), [as void, ][illegal, and contrary ][to the ][provisions]of lncome-tax Act and contrary to [the ][Principles ][of ][Natural ][Justice] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. Counsel for the Respondent Nos.lto4: [M/s. ] [R. ] (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) Counsel for the Respondent No.5: [GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR,]DY. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIWRIT PEIITIOIT No.5626 OF 2o24 ORIIER:@er Hon'ble Si Justie P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.T.Chaitanya Kumar, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Sundari R. Pisupati, learned SeniorStanding Counsel for the Income Tax Department forrespondents. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been hled theby petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following relief: "to issue on oppropriote writ order or direction more porticulorly one inthe noture of Writ of Mondomus decloring the subsequent notices issuedby the (Notional Foceless E-Assessment Centre) ond the notice u/s 749Dt 19.04.2022 in ITBA/AST/S/148 1/2O22-23/1U2782430(1) issued bythe JA0(1't respondent) insteod of FAO(jd respondent), os void, illegol,ond controry to the provisions of lncome-tox Act ond contrcry to thePrinciples of Noturol justice". 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ Petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act which carne into effect from 2. The instant Writ Petition has been hled theby petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking for the following relief: "to issue on oppropriote writ order or direction more porticulorly one inthe noture of Writ of Mondomus decloring the subsequent notices issuedby the (Notional Foceless E-Assessment Centre) ond the notice u/s 749Dt 19.04.2022 in ITBA/AST/S/148 1/2O22-23/1U2782430(1) issued bythe JA0(1't respondent) insteod of FAO(jd respondent), os void, illegol,ond controry to the provisions of lncome-tox Act ond contrcry to thePrinciples of Noturol justice". 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ Petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act which carne into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l,therespondents,whileproceedingunderSection 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' ][the]proceedings [to ][be ][drawn ][are also ][in ][a ][faceless ][manner'] 4. Whereas, [learned counsel ][for the ][petitioner]contended [that, ][in ][the instant ][case' ][reopenlng][ has ][been]initiated [by the ][Jurisdictional ][Assessing ][Officer' ][In ][support]of his contention, [he ][relied ][upon ][the ][recent judgment]rendered [by this ][very Bench ][in ][WP'No'25903 ][of ][2022 ][&]dated [l4.Og'2023 ][wherein ][this ][Court ][disposed ][of ][the]batch, batch of [writ ][petitions ][to ][the ][limited ][extent'] On the the [[other ][hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ]][[hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ]][[Counsel ]][[for ][the]][[the]] 5. On the the [[other ][hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ]][[hand, learned Standing ][Counsel ]][[Counsel ]][[for ][the]][[the]]respond.ent-Department [does ][not ][dispute ][that the ][said]objection [was ][decided ][in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions.However,hefurthercontendedthatapartfromthe aforesaid [objection, ][there ][have been ][other ][various]objections [also ][which the petitioner ][has raised ][in ][the ][writ]petition. It 6. So far as this contention [of ]the [learned ][counsel for]the respondent-Department [is ][concerned, ][this ][Bench, while]disposing of said batch of writ [petitions, had taken ][note of]the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 [which ][are ][reproduced]herein under: "37. Tle preliminary [objection ][raised ][by ][the ][petitioner]is sustained ond all these uit [petitiorts ][stands ][allowed]on this uery [juisdictional ]issue. [Since ][the ][impugned]notices and orders are [getting ][quosled ][on tlrc ][point ][of]jurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further anddecide the other issues raised bg [the ][petitioner ][uhich]stands reserued to be raised and [contended ][in ][an]oppropiate proceeding s. ["] "38. Since the Hon'ble [Stpreme ][Court ][had, ][in ][tte ][case]of Ashish Aga ru.tal, supra, os a [one-time ][measure]exercising the pouers under Article [142 ][of ][the]Constitution of India, [permitted ][the Reuenue ][to ][proceed]under tle substituted prouisions, and this [Court]allouing the petitions only on [the ][procedural ]J7au, [tLrc]right conferred on the Reuenue would [remain ][reserved]to proceed further if ttteg so want from [the stage ][of ][tle]order of tle Supreme Court in the [cose ]of [Ashish]Agarual, supra." 7. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow [the] present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, thepresent Writ Petition stands allowed [on ]the objection [of the]petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn [in]accordance with the amended [provision ]but under theun-arnended provision which is [otherwise ]not sustainable. i I 7. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow [the] present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, thepresent Writ Petition stands allowed [on ]the objection [of the]petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn [in]accordance with the amended [provision ]but under theun-arnended provision which is [otherwise ]not sustainable. i I 8. As has been [held by ][this ][Bench ][in ][the ][aforesaid batch]matters, [the ][rights ][of ][the ][parties ][would stand ][reserved ][as ][is]at [paragraph ][Nos'37 ][& ][38 ][of the ][said ][order]envisaged passed in the [batch ][of ][writ ][petitions' ][No ][order as ][to ][costs']Consequently, [miscellaneous ][petitions pending' ][if ][any']shall stand [closed.] 8. SD/- T. R EASSISTANT //TRUE SECTION [ R] t"*To,1 rhe orrice or rhe rn-come ll[PJi:?i,Y3f"'tf ?81fi3il]":lnfB: ':Il:J,l[:3'"r"|;'J""",1u'a;"*;]ir'ii.,iii""r'Hvi"iziuosoooza'f, :fiH":fiH"'IiH"B:g.l:'"^f; [ii$s&ffi :ls:s.[:l;:"TIl'sf ]New Delhi [- ][110 ][001 ]'lL[]3!;Jl[?]iffi Tax Department, [New]+. i[J r[r'ril'"rt' [Ficeless ][Assessrnent ][center' ] [ncome]Delhi.q The Secretary, Union or lndia'-Government' [Departrnent ][of Revenue' ][Ministry] f, :fiH":fiH" i, [g# ]:: [ [$n ]tffiwdSn"mr','rH]$ffiti'n'ff1r,"tNotn toPuc]9. Two [CD CoPies]BMGJP a I HIGH COURT DATED:04/0312024 ORDER WP.No.5626 o12024 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITIONWTHOUT COSTS Oo+"\q 1Y\ [rAr€]kt'vf,a.c(;1..)$ [B fiN ][?n24]*t oesp.qtc il