Smt. Sujatha Kusuma vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/11650/2023HC TelanganaHBHC01021420202326 April 2023Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, after hearing the parties at length, noted that the learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed on withdrawal. No costs were imposed. The operative directions were to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn and close all pending miscellaneous petitions. The High Court did not decide on the legality or validity of the order passed under Section 148A(d) or the notice issued under Section 148 on their merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ms. Sriradha Kusuma, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-1, under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated March 30, 2023. The petitioner also challenged the consequential notice dated March 30, 2023, issued under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that these orders were illegal, arbitrary, passed without application of mind, and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner also sought a stay on the operation of the Section 148 notice and all consequential proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 30.03.2023, and the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2016-17 are illegal, arbitrary, and passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice without application of mind. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the order and notice were illegal, arbitrary, and passed without application of mind, violating principles of natural justice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[ 3311 ] H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWENry SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 11650 OF 2023 Between: 9T!.-Sr.!ia!ha Kusuma, Aged about 28 years, Wo. Srinivas Kusuma. 4-10l2, 4-'10l3, Pakhala Road, Nasampet, Warahgal - 506132, Telangana State. ...PETITIONER The lncome Tax Officer,.Ward - 1, 3rd Floor, Mayuri Complex, Opp. TSNpDCL Bhavan, Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda, Warangal : SOOOO1. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Fligh court may be pleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of WRli OF MANDAMUS holding that the order passed by Respondent uis.148A(d) of the Act, dt.30.03.2023 with DIN.ITBA/AST/Ft14gAt2O22-23t1O51702199(.1 ) and the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under section 148 of the Act with DlN.lrBA/AST/sl148-112022-231't051707148(1) for the assessment year 2016- 't7, as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without application of mind, and consequenfly set aside the same fA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the notice issued by the Respondent u/s.14g of the Act, dt.30.03.2023 for the assessment yeat 2016'17 with DIN.ITBA/AST/51148_112022-2311051707148(1) and ail consequentiat proceedings thereto AND Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. A. V. RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRl. J. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) i I II The Court made the following: ORDER

TIIE HAN tI,E TIIE (]I{IEFJUS'LI-CE ALB UYAN Af{D THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE N.TUKARAMII W.P.No.11 650 of 2023 ORDER 1?et thc t lot.'hl rhe Lhi.J ltttir t.'Ji li Bl,ryan) 4. In r.reu, of the above. writ pcution is dismisscd on withdrawal N() cos ts 2. Bl trJrng rhrs pcrinon rrrrrlcr .\rriclc 226 of thc Consdruuon of lndia, pcrrtroner has assarlt rl lcgalirr and validitv of thc ()rdcr Heard \Ir. ,\.\r.llagh r-rta rn. lcuncd counsel for the penuoncr and tr{r. J.V.Prasad. learned Standrng ( -ounsel, Income -I'ax Department for thc rcspondenr darcd 30.03,2023 pesscd b), thc responclent under Scction 148r\(d) of the yca.r 2016-201.1 3. .\fter hcarrng thc urattcnt sornc length, Icarncd counsel for thc petitioncr -"celis lcave to wrlhclm\r thc writ petiuon Lrcomc 'l'ax -\ct. 1961 (bncflr 'thc .\ct' hcreinafter) for the assessrnent Asase qqe,l . miscellancorrs Pcnuons, endrng if any, stand closed- I //TRUE COPY// SD/. K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRA SECTlON OFFICER To,1 9"" CC to SRt. A. V. RAGHU RAM, Advocate tOpUCl 2. One CC to sRt. J. v PRASAD (SC FOR rruCijrrirE rnx) topucl . Jii cD copies GJP w

HIGH COURT DATED:2610412023 ORDER WP.No.11650 of 2023 ) .s-\ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →