Wp/7469/2024 Of Smt. Borlakuntaananthalaxmi v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 7469 OF 2024 Between: Smt. Borlakunta Anantha Laxmi,D/o D.Rajam, Aged about 42 [years, ]Occ ;Employees, Flat No. 302, AceClassicApts, Road No. 10A, New Nagole,Hyderabad- 500036. .....PETITIONER AND 1. Assrstant Commissioner of lncome [Tax, ]Circle [9(1), ][Hyderabad, lncome ][Tax]Towers, AC Guards, I\/asab Tank,Hyderabad- 500004.Towers, AC Guards, I\/asab Tank,Hyderabad- 500004. 2. Principal Chief Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax ][lncome ][Tax ][Towers, ] Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- [500004.]Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- [500004.] 3. The Assessment Unit, lncome [Tax Department National Faceless]Assessment Centre Room No [401 ], 2nd [Floor ERamp Jawaharlal ][Nehru]Stadium Delhi 110003.Assessment Centre Room No [401 ], 2nd [Floor ERamp Jawaharlal ][Nehru]Stadium Delhi 110003. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution [of ][lndia praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances stated in the [affidavit ][filed ][therewith, ][the ][High ][Court may ][be]pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more [particularly ][one in the ][nature ][of]Writ of Mandamus, declaring the [impugned Order ][dated ][09-02-2024 passed ][u/s]147 oI the Act vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/Si [14712023- 2411060711036(1), bv ][the ][3'd]respondent for A. Y. 2015- 16, [pursuant ][to the order u/s 148A(d)dt ][07 ][' ][04 ][2022]and notice rssued u/s 148 dated [11-o4-2O22 ][by ][the ][JAO instead ][of ][FAO, as ][void,]illegal, and contrary to the Provisions [of ][lncome- ][tax Act ][and ][contrary ][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 rnay be pleased tostay all the further proceedings initiated by the 3rdRespondent against thePetitioner. pursuant to the impugned order passed under section 147 of the Act,vide DIN and order no, ITBA/AST/S/14712023- 241106071'1036(i), datedOglO2l2O24 for the Assessment Year 2015- 1. 6 in PAN till finaldisposal this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR Counsel for the Respondents : M/s B.SAPNA REDDY, ADVOCATE FORsRr J.V.PRASAD (SC FOR TNCOME TAX) The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSI{YANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJIWRIT PEIIITION No.7469 OF 2024 ORDER (per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Sri M.Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. B.Sapna Reddy, learned counselrepresenting Sri J.V. Prasad, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the Income Tax Department for therespondents. Perused the material on record. 2. TLre instant Writ Petition has been filed by thepetitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking the following relief; "...to issue a writ order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring theimpugned Order dt.O9.O2.2O24 passed u/s 147 of theAct vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/I47/2023-24/1060711036(1), by the 3rd respondent for A.Y. 2015-16, pursnant to the order u/s 148A(d) dt.O7 -O4.2O22and notice issued u/s 148 dt. I L.O4.2O22 by the JAOinstead of FAO, as void, illegal and contrary to theProwisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to thePrinciples of Natural Justice and pass such ottrerorders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and properin the circumstances of the case..." 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ Petition is that under the amended PSK,J & l\rrR,JW.P.No.7469 of 2024 "...to issue a writ order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring theimpugned Order dt.O9.O2.2O24 passed u/s 147 of theAct vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/I47/2023-24/1060711036(1), by the 3rd respondent for A.Y. 2015-16, pursnant to the order u/s 148A(d) dt.O7 -O4.2O22and notice issued u/s 148 dt. I L.O4.2O22 by the JAOinstead of FAO, as void, illegal and contrary to theProwisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to thePrinciples of Natural Justice and pass such ottrerorders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and properin the circumstances of the case..." 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ Petition is that under the amended PSK,J & l\rrR,JW.P.No.7469 of 2024 provisions of the Act which came into effect fromO1.O4.2021, the respondents, while proceeding underSection 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice underSection 1484, and provide an opportunity of hearing to theSection 1484, 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.4. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitionerproceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner.4. 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 judgmentinitiated 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 ebatch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of thebatch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of thebatch. of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. 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 writ 6. 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 ofthe same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised bg thepetitioner is sustained and all tlrcse utrit petitionsstands allowed on this uery juisdictional issue.Since the impugned notices and orders are gettingquashed on the point of jurisdiction, we are notinclined to proceed further and decide the otlrcrissues raised bg the petitioner whtch standsreserued to be raised and contended in anap p rop riate p roce e ding s.' "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tLecase of Ashish Agaru.tal, supra, as a one-timemeasure exercising the powers under Article 142 ofthe Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue toproceed under the substituted prouisions, and thisCourt allowing the petitions onlg on tLrc proceduralJlaw, [the ][right ][conferced ][on ][tLe ][Reuenue ][would]remain reserued to proceed further if th.eg so utantfrom [the stage ][of ][tLrc ][order ][of ][the ][Supreme Court ][in]the case of Ashish Agartua| supra." 7. 7. In 'riew of the sarne, we are inclined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly,the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection ofthe petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision but under theun-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aJoresaid batchmatters, the right of the parties would stand reserved as isenvisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said orderpassed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if anyshall stand closed. SD/- C, PRAVEEN ASSISTANT REGISR //TRUE COPY//SECTION OICER 7. 7. In 'riew of the sarne, we are inclined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly,the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection ofthe petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision but under theun-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aJoresaid batchmatters, the right of the parties would stand reserved as isenvisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said orderpassed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if anyshall stand closed. SD/- C, PRAVEEN ASSISTANT REGISR //TRUE COPY//SECTION OICER To1. The Assistant commissioner [of lncome Tax, Circle 9(1), Hyderabad, lncome]Tax Towers, AC Guards, [Masab ][Tank,Hyderabad- 500004']z. fn" [pii".iput ]Chief [Comhissioner ][of lncome ][Tax ][lncome Tax Towers' AC]Guards,Masab Tank, [Hyderabad- ][500CC4.] 3. - ' ihe Assessment Centre Assessment [Unit, lhcome Tax De?artment National Faceless][Room ][No ][4O1 ][, ][2"d ][Floor ERamp Jawaharlal ][Nehru]Stadium Delhi [1 ]10003.Stadium Delhi [1 ]10003. 4. One CC to Sri [Venkatram Reddy ][Mantur, ][Advocate ][ ] 5. One CC to Sri [J.V.Prasad (SC FOR ] [TAX) ] 6 Two CD Copies6 Two CD Copies SAKKS a_id ,tY,. HIGH COURTDATED:2210312024 ORDER WP.No.7469 [of ][2024] ALLOWING [W.P]WITHOUT [COSTS.] (.-'v^L\@rqtn\q0j- 1 ll i,l'