Wp/7854/2024 Of Sri Rajarajeswara Modern Rice Mill v. Office Of The Income Tax Officer

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCHTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHYANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJIWRIT PETITION NO: 7854 OF 2024 Between: Sri Rajaraleswara Modern Rice tt/ill, rep. by its Partner Kankaiah [Muchakurthi,]S/o Rajariallu, Occupation Business, [Aged ][64 ][H.No. 21-2-165, ][Markadeya]Colony, Godavarikhani, District Karimnagar 505209, [Telangana, ] 'l$Ei,.,or=* AND 1. Office of The lncome Tax Officer, [Ward-2 ][Karimnagar ][Telangana ][State]2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax ][Telangana a@ ][AP,]Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, [lvlasab ][Tank, Hyderabad ][500 028,]Telangana2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax ][Telangana a@ ][AP,]Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, [lvlasab ][Tank, Hyderabad ][500 028,]Telangana 3. The C-entral Board of Direct [Taxes, Represented ][by its ][Chairman, Department]of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government [of lndia, Secretariat ][Buildings,]New Delhi - 1'10 001of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government [of lndia, Secretariat ][Buildings,]New Delhi - 1'10 001 4. The National Faceless Assessment Center, [lncome Tax Department, ][New]DelhiDelhi 5. The Union of lndia, Represenled by [its ][Secretary ][to the Government,]Department of Revenue, Ministry of [Finance, ][New ][Delhi ][- ][, rO ]99#rroroa*r,Department of Revenue, Ministry of [Finance, ][New ][Delhi ][- ][, rO ]99#rroroa*r,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]pleaspd to issue an appropriate writ. order or direction [more ][particularly ][one ][in ][the]nature of Writ of Mandamus [declaring ][the ][order ][passed ][by the ][lncome ][Tax]Authorities (National Facetess [E-Assessment ][centre ][completed ][the ][assessment]UtS 147 r/w Section 144-8 of [the ][lncome Tax ][Act, ][1961 ][vide DIN and Notice ][No.]dated 26102t2o24 in ITBA/ASrlst147l2O23-24/1061496856(1) [for ][the ][assessment]year 2015-16 determining the total [income ][of ][Rs' ][99'67'310/- ][as ][arbitrary, ][illegal,]bad in law, without iurisdiction, [vord-ab-inilio, violative ][of ][the ][principles ][of ][natural]justice apart from being violative of [Articles ]14' [19(1)(g) ][and ]265 [of ][the] Constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1 961 , andconsequently set aside the same in the interests of [justice] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: SMT. SUNDARI R PISUPATI(Sr SC FoR INCOME TAx) Counsel for Respondent No. 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FORSRt GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR,DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL The Court made the following: ORDER THT HON'BLE SRI [P.SAM ] ANDTHEiHON,BLE SRI [N.TUI(ARAMJI]WRITON No.78 s4 0F [2024] ORDER: [(per ][FIo ][n'ble ][Si ][Justice ][P.SAM ][KOSH\[)] The instant Writ [Petition ][has ][been ][frled ][by ][the]under [Articl ][e ][226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ][of ][India]petitioner for the [following relief:]seeking Constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1 961 , andconsequently set aside the same in the interests of [justice] Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: SMT. SUNDARI R PISUPATI(Sr SC FoR INCOME TAx) Counsel for Respondent No. 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FORSRt GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR,DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL The Court made the following: ORDER THT HON'BLE SRI [P.SAM ] ANDTHEiHON,BLE SRI [N.TUI(ARAMJI]WRITON No.78 s4 0F [2024] ORDER: [(per ][FIo ][n'ble ][Si ][Justice ][P.SAM ][KOSH\[)] The instant Writ [Petition ][has ][been ][frled ][by ][the]under [Articl ][e ][226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ][of ][India]petitioner for the [following relief:]seeking "...to [issue ][an oppropiate ][tuit ][order or direction ][more]partiatlarlg one in the [nature ][of Wit ][of ][Mandamus]'d.eclainq the order passed ba the Income TaxAuthoities National [Faceless ][E-Assessment ][Ce-ntre]the [assessment ][tl/S ][147 ][r/u ][Section ][l44B]completed of t:he Income [Tax ][Act 1961 ][uide DIN ][and ][Notice ][No]dated 26.02.2024 [in ]ITBA/ AST/ S/ [147/ ][2023-]24/ 10614968561 for [fhe ][assessment ][Ltear ][201516]the [total ][income ][of ][Rs ][99,67,31O/ ][- ][as]d.e,termining arbitrary illeqal [bad ][in ][lau ][u-tithout ][iuisdictiort ][uoid-ab-]initio violatiue [of ]tle [principles ][of natural ][iustice apart]from [beina ][uiolatiue ][of ][Articles ][14 ][19(1)(q) ][and 265 ][of]the Constitution [of ][Indio ][and ][Sec ][148A ][of ][the ][In'come]Tax Act 1961 [and ][consequenthl ][set aside ][the same ][in]*e interests of [justice ][and ][pass. ]'" 2. Heard Mr. Thanneru [Chaitanya ][Kumar, ][learned]counsel for the Petitioner; [Ms' ][Sundari ][R' ][Pisupathi']learned Senior [Standing ][Counsel ][for ][Income ][Tax ][for]Nos.l [to 4 ][and ][Mr' B' ][Mukerjee' ][learned]respondent 2. counsel representing Mr. Gadi praveen Kumar, learnedDeputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.S andDeputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.S andPerused the record. 3. One of the contentions of the contentions contentions that the petitioner has raisedthe petitioner has raisedhas raisedraisedin the present Writ petition is that under the amendedprovisions of the Act which carne into effect fromO1.O4.2O21, 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 Officer. In supportof his contention, he relied upon the recent judgmentrendered by this very Bench in Wp.No.259O3 of 2022 &batch, dated 14.09.2023 wherein this Court disposed ot thebatch of writ petitions to the limited extent. One of the contentions of the contentions contentions that the petitioner has raisedthe petitioner has raisedhas raisedraised On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel other hand, learned Standing Counsel learned Standing Counsel Counsel for thethe 5On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel other hand, learned Standing Counsel learned Standing Counsel Counsel for thetherespondent-Department does not dispute that the said objection was decided [in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions. However, he further [contended ][that ][apart ][from]the aforesaid objection, th... [tt'"*'. ][been ][other ][various]objections also which the [petitioner ][has raised ][in ][the ][writ]petition. So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of the ][learned counsel ]][[learned counsel ]][[for]] On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel other hand, learned Standing Counsel learned Standing Counsel Counsel for thethe 5On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel other hand, learned Standing Counsel learned Standing Counsel Counsel for thetherespondent-Department does not dispute that the said objection was decided [in ][the ][aforesaid ][batch ][of ][Writ]Petitions. However, he further [contended ][that ][apart ][from]the aforesaid objection, th... [tt'"*'. ][been ][other ][various]objections also which the [petitioner ][has raised ][in ][the ][writ]petition. So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of the ][learned counsel ]][[learned counsel ]][[for]] 6. So far as this contention far as this contention as this contention this contention contention [[of the ][learned counsel ]][[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. TfE preliminary [objection ][raised bg ][the ][petitioner]is sustairted and atl these uit [petitions stands ][alloued]on thb very [junsdictional issue. ][Since ][the ][impugned]notices and orders are [getting ][qtasled ][on ][the ][point ][of]jurisdiction" we are not inclined to [proceed ]further [and]-decide the oth.er tlssues raised bg the petitioner uhichstands reserued to be [raised ][ond ][contended ][in ][an]appropiate [proeeding ][s. ]" "38. Sine the [Hon'bte ][Supreme ][Court ][had, in ][tLrc ][[cose]] "38. Sine the [[cose]]of Ashish Agarutal, s [pra., ][as ][a ][one-time ][measure]exercising tle [potaers ][under ][Article 142 ][of ][the]Constituiion of India, [permitted ][the ][Reuenue ][to ][proceed]under the substidtted [prouisions, ][and ][this ][Court]allowing the [petitions ][only on ][th.e ][procedural ]Jlaw, [the]ight conferred on the [Reuenue ][uould ][remain ][reserued]to proeed furtlar if [theg ][so ][want ]Jrom [the ][stage ][of ][the]ortler of the Supreme [Court ][in ][the ][case ][of ][Ashish]Aganaa| supra." 7 . In view of the szune, we are inclined to allow view of the szune, we are inclined to allow of the szune, we are inclined to allow szune, we are inclined to allow we are inclined to allow to allow allow thepresent writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, thepresent Writ Petition stands allou/ed 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.un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. In view of the szune, we are inclined to allow view of the szune, we are inclined to allow of the szune, we are inclined to allow szune, we are inclined to allow we are inclined to allow to allow allow the 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batchmatters, the rights 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.Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,shall stand closed SD/- MOHD. SANAULLAH ANS/RIASSISTANT REGISTRARSECTIONFICER //TRUE COPY// To, In view of the szune, we are inclined to allow view of the szune, we are inclined to allow of the szune, we are inclined to allow szune, we are inclined to allow we are inclined to allow to allow allow the 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batchmatters, the rights 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.Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,shall stand closed SD/- MOHD. SANAULLAH ANS/RIASSISTANT REGISTRARSECTIONFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1The Office of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-2 Karimnagar Telangana StateThe Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax Telangana and A.P,Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 500 028,TelanganaThe Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax Telangana and A.P,Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 500 028,Telangana3The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Departmentof Revenue. Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings,New Delhi - 1 [.10 ]001of Revenue. Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings,New Delhi - 1 [.10 ]0014The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, NewDelhiDelhi5The Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry ofFinance. New Delhi - 1 10 001Finance. New Delhi - 1 10 0016One CC to Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar Advocate 7One CC to Smt. Sundari R Pisupati (Sr SC for lncome Tax D-ept) AdvocateloPUCl7One CC to Smt. Sundari R Pisupati (Sr SC for lncome Tax D-ept) AdvocateloPUCl One CC to Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia [OpUC]9Two CD Copres MBCGJPGJP &x HIGH COURT DATED: 2710312024 ,'? .. cr-.' ,,\.-.j o,./, '.l-ii, _il,o01tlU:i7l)24al: :l:':t"fr"'ORDER WP.No.7854 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS