Wp/7568/2024 Of Radha Rani Battini v. Income Tax Officer

[ [337s ]] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAhIGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE T\A/ENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHYAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO:7568 OF 2024 Between: Radha Rani Battini, Wo B Radha Kishan, Age - 56 [years, ]Occupation -Housewife, H.No.2-10-848/504, Avasa Apartment, Flat No. 504, Opp. A to ZMedical shop, SBH Colony, Subedari, Hanamkonda, Telangana [- ]506001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Warangal, lncome Tax Office, D.No. l-6-810,3rd Floor, Mayuri Complex, OPP.TSNPDCL Bhawan, Nakkalagutta,Hanamkonda, Warangal, Telangana - 506001.3rd Floor, Mayuri Complex, OPP.TSNPDCL Bhawan, Nakkalagutta,Hanamkonda, Warangal, Telangana - 506001.2. Ttre Principal Chief Commissioner of lrrcome Tax, AP and TS,10th Floor, C-Block, LT. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004.Block, LT. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 3- The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National FacelessAssessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. ...RES'ONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia [praying ]that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court [may ][be]pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt. [14.03.2024]passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 r.w.s 1448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.Y.2015-16 vide DIN No. lTBtuASTlSl14712023- 2411062666287(1), [which ][rs]passed as a consequence of the order passed uis 14BA(d) dt.22 04.2022 videDIN No. ITBA/AST/F/148A12022-2311042811479(1) and the notice u/s 148dt.2204.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST|S|148_112022- 231104281954 1(1), issuedby rhe JA0{1st respondent) instead of FAO(3rd respondent),that too contrary toprovisions of section 149 of the Act, as void, illegal, and contrary to theprovisions of Income{ax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice, lA 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 may be pleased tostay all further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order dt. 14.03.?024passed by the 3rd respondent uls 147 r.w.s'1a4B of the lncome-tax Act for A.y.20 1 5 - 1 6 vide D I N No ITBA/AST/S I 1 47 t2023- 24 I 1 062666287 (1) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VtJHAy K PUNNA (SENIOR SC FOR ITD)The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAIVI KOSITYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TIIKARAMJIWRIT PETITION I{o.7568 OF 2o24 ORDER:1per Ho n'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan, learned counsel for thepetitioner and Sri Vrjay K. Punna, learned Senior StaldingCounsel for the Income Tax Department for [the]respondents. Perused the material on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed by thepetitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking the following relief; Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VtJHAy K PUNNA (SENIOR SC FOR ITD)The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAIVI KOSITYANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TIIKARAMJIWRIT PETITION I{o.7568 OF 2o24 ORDER:1per Ho n'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan, learned counsel for thepetitioner and Sri Vrjay K. Punna, learned Senior StaldingCounsel for the Income Tax Department for [the]respondents. Perused the material on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed by thepetitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiaseeking the following relief; "... to issue an appropriate writ order or direction [more]particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamusdeclaring the Assessment Order dt.14.O3.2O24 [passed]by the 3'd respondent [tuls ]147 r.w.s 144E} of [the]lncome-tax Act for A.Y. 2015-16 vide DIN [No.]ITBA/ ASri S/ L 47 / 2023-24 / LO62ffi6287 [(r), ][which ][is]passed as a consequence of the order passed u/s148A(d) dt. 22.04.2022 vide DIN No.IrBA/AST/ F/ laa{ I 2022-23 I LO428t r47 [9( ]1) [and ][the]notice u/s 148 dt.22.O4.2O22 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/ S/ va _I I 2022-23 I rM2Al954 [1 ][( ][1 ]), issuedby the JAO (1"1 respondent) instead of FAO 13'arespondent), that too contraqr to provisions of Section149 of the Act as void, illegal, and contrary to theprovisions of Income-tax Act and contrary to thePrinciples of Natural Justice and [pass.. ]." 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisedin the present Writ Petition is that under ttre amendedprovisions of the Act which c€une into effect fromOl.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding underSection 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice underSection 148A 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 petitionercontended that, in the instant case, reopening has beeninitiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Offrcer. In supportof his contention, he relied upon the recent judgmentrendered by this very Bench in Wp.No.25903 of 2022 &batch, dated L4 .O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of thebatch of writ petitions to the limited extent.initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Offrcer. In supportof his contention, he relied upon the recent judgmentrendered by this very Bench in Wp.No.25903 of 2022 &batch, dated L4 .O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of thebatch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, Iearned Standing Counsel for therespondent-Department does not dispute that the saidobjection was decided in the a-foresaid batch of WritPetitions. Hou'ever, he further contended that apart fromthe aforesaid objection, there have been othei- iibrious objections also which the petitioner has raised in the writpetition. 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 reproducedherein under: "37. Tte prelimtnary objection raised bg thepetitioner is sustained and all these writ petitinnsstands allowed on this uery [juridictional ]issue.Stnce the impugned rwtices and orders are gettingquashed on the point of juisdiction, ute are notinclined to proceed further and deci.de tle otherissues raised bg the petittoner which standsreserued to be raised and contended in anap p ro p riate p roce eding s. " "38. Since tle Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in th.ecase of Ashish Aganual, supra, a.s a one-timemeasure exercising the powers under Article 142 ofthe Constitution of India, permitted the Reuenue toproceed under tle substituted prouisions, and thisCourt allouing the petitions onlg on the proceduralflaut, [tlrc ][nght ][confeted ][on ][th.e ][Reuenue would]remain reserued to proceed furttter if theg so u)antfrom [the stage ][of ][the ][order of ][the ][Suprem.e ][Court ][in]the case of Ashish Agarual, supra." "38. Since tle Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in th.ecase of Ashish Aganual, supra, a.s a one-timemeasure exercising the powers under Article 142 ofthe Constitution of India, permitted the Reuenue toproceed under tle substituted prouisions, and thisCourt allouing the petitions onlg on the proceduralflaut, [tlrc ][nght ][confeted ][on ][th.e ][Reuenue would]remain reserued to proceed furttter if theg so u)antfrom [the stage ][of ][the ][order of ][the ][Suprem.e ][Court ][in]the case of Ashish Agarual, supra." 7. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the PSr,J & ArrR,JW.P.No.7568 oJ 2024 present 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. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid 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. To, 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if anyshall stand closed SD/-N. SRIHAR]ASSISTANT REGISTRARSECTIFICER //TRUE COPY// 1. '' The lncome [Tax Officer, Ward ][- ][1' ]!va1a1-g.a-l,.l19olle [Tax ][Office' ][D'No ][16-]ai'o'C"iFroor, Mavuri Complex. OPP TSNPDCL Bhawan' Nakkalagutta'Hanamkonda, [Warangal. Telangana ][- 506001']ai'o'C"iFroor, Mavuri Complex. OPP TSNPDCL Bhawan' Nakkalagutta'Hanamkonda, [Warangal. Telangana ][- 506001'] Hanamkonda, 2. - il;-i;i;;ip;I'cn'eic6m.iision"er Bi;;i, i.i.%wers, 10-2-3 AC Guards [of lncome ]Hvderabad-sooOM[rax, ] [and TS'1Oth ][Floor' ] S. iir;Asse..ment [Unit, ][lncome ][Tax ][Department,llational ][Faceless]- il;;a;il;t Centie oelr,i [n/|rnisirv ][of ]['Finance' ][Room ][No ][401'znd ][Floor' ] Ramo. Jawaharlal Nehru [Stadium, ][Delhr-1 ][10003']S. iir;Asse..ment [Unit, ][lncome ][Tax ][Department,llational ][Faceless]- il;;a;il;t Centie oelr,i [n/|rnisirv ][of ]['Finance' ][Room ][No ][401'znd ][Floor' ] Ramo. Jawaharlal Nehru [Stadium, ][Delhr-1 ][10003'] +. cin6edto d. o;; cc i. [shi ]Snt [vtJHAY ][ouNou ] [MANMoHAN ] [(sENloR ][Advoca-te-[^oPUc] ][sc ][FoR ][lrD) ][[oPUc]]--. ^. 6. Two CD CoPies BMBS w HIGH COURT DATED:2210312024 ORDER WP.No.7568 of 2024 1 [rrE ][5 ][l,i ][i'4-](t)i4oL)0 3 ilN [Zt[l].t*t j\-- or_5rE ALLOWING THE WRITPETITIONWITHOUT COSTS Iat+Wfiiftl