Vedprakash Agarwal vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 22212OF 2022 Between: Vedprakash Aganval, S/o. Late Mr. Ramchandra {garwa! Aged about-65 Yeais R/o.21-6-399, Ghansi Bazar, Chandra Chowjhula, Hyderabad - 500 oo2' Telangana ...PETrroNER AND 1. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle - B(1), Hyderabad 2. Assistant Director of lncome Tax, lnvestigation, DDIT/ADIT (lnv.) 1(1)' HYderabad ...RESP.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass a writ, order, or direction, more particularly in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the order dated 07 -04-2022 issued u/s. 14BA(d) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/F/148N2022- 2311042600289 (1) dated 07 -04-2022 passed by the Respondent No. 1 for the assessment year 2015-16 and the consequent notice u/s. 148 of the lncome Tax Ac, 1961, dated 07-04-2022 bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/148-112022- 2311042601042 (1)as being void, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of law and consequently set aside the same lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 lo stay the operation of the impugned order dated 07-04-2022 issued uis. 148A(d) lncome Tax Act, 1961 bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/148-112O22- 2311042601042 (1) dated 07-04-2022 passed by the Respondent No. 1 and the consequent notice u/s.

148 of the lncome Tax Act, '1961, dated 07 -O4-2O22 bearing DIN No TTBAJAST/F/1 48 At2O22-23t 1 042600285 (1) lA 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 permit the Petitioner to raise this additional ground and consequenfly close the above writ petition bearing w.P. No. 22212 of 2022 taking into consideration the judgment rendered by this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No. 25903 of 2022 and batch Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. S. ASSOCIATES Counsel for Respondents: SRf. B. NARASIMHA SARMA The Court made the following: ORDER

7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI{ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.22212 oF 2022 ORDER:/per FIo n'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 196 I (for short "the Act, 196 1") bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/to426oo289 (1), dated 07.04.2022 passed by respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2015-16 and the consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, dated O7.O4.2O22 bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/ S/ t 48 _r / 2022-23 / to426o to42 (tl. 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which came into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were reqrrired to issue notice under Section 148A arrd provide an opportunity of hearing to the

2 PSK,J & AITR,J W.P.No.22272 of 2022 assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless m€rnner. 3. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in the instant case, reopening 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.259O3 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-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, there have been other various objections also which the petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 5. 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

3 PSK,J & AITR,J W.P.No.22272 o;f 2O22 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: "37. The preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustained and all these uit petitions stands allouLed on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quasLrcd on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised bg the petitioner which stands reserued to be raised and contended iru an ap p ropiate pro ce e ding s. " "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agaruua| supra, as a one-time measure exercising the pouers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substttuted prouisions, and this Court allouing the petitions onlg on the procedural flaw, tle ight conferred on tle Reuenue would remain reserued to proceed further if theg so want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aganaal, suPra." 6. In view of the sarne, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present 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 the un- amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. , ,

4 PSK,J Ab NTR,J W.P.No.22272 of 2022 7 . As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the right of the respondents would stand reserved as is envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 8. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, Hvderabad a. oi,i,-bti" sri R. S' Associates Advocate [oP-qq .^- ;. o;; cc io Sti B Narasimha Sarma Advocate [oPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies MBC GJ SD/. T.VIJAY KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle - 8('t ) i. n'Jiirii"ii:ireaor of lncome Tax, lnvestigation, DDIT/AD Hyderabad lT (lnv.) 1(1), B

/l HIGH COURT DATED: 2311112023 HE STAT 1 € [ 4 JA'r'l 2C24 DEspn;cH-o ORDER WP.No.22212 of 2022 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS q zo ^5 o,J f:+ * €o e? }}