Mrs. Feroza Banu vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/5385/2024HC TelanganaHBHC01010507202429 February 2024Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition on the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner. The Court held that the proceedings were not drawn in accordance with the amended provisions of the Act but under the un-amended provisions, which is unsustainable. The Court relied on its previous decision in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated September 14, 2023, where similar writ petitions were allowed on the jurisdictional issue. The Court noted that in the previous batch of cases, all petitions were allowed on the jurisdictional issue, and other issues raised by the petitioners were reserved to be raised in appropriate proceedings. The Court also referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Ashish Agrawal, where the Revenue was permitted to proceed under the substituted provisions as a one-time measure. Consequently, the present writ petition was allowed on similar terms, with the rights of the parties reserved as envisaged in the previous order. No order as to costs was made.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mrs. Feroza Banu, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated April 7, 2022, and a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, also dated April 7, 2022, for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner contended that the respondents initiated reassessment proceedings under the amended provisions of the Act, which came into effect from April 1, 2021. These amended provisions mandate the issuance of a notice under Section 148A and an opportunity for hearing to the assessee, with proceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner. The petitioner argued that the reassessment was initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, contrary to the faceless assessment procedure.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated by the respondents for assessment year 2015-16, by issuing a notice under Section 148 dated April 7, 2022, and an order under Section 148A(d) dated April 7, 2022, are illegal and arbitrary for being passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and without application of mind, specifically concerning the procedural requirements under the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, effective from April 1, 2021. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the amended provisions of Section 148A and Section 148 of the Act, effective from April 1, 2021, require the issuance of a notice under Section 148A and an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, with proceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment by the same Bench in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated September 14, 2023. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent-Department did not dispute that the objection regarding the procedure was decided in the aforesaid batch of writ petitions. However, the counsel pointed out that the petitioner had raised other objections as well.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 5385 OF 2024 Between: Mrs. Feroza Banu, Wo. Mr. Mohd. lbrahim, aged about 62 years, 9-4-5, Barkatpura, Nizamabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1, 6-2-15613, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503002. 2. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1,2"o Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 'l'10 003. ...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 pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS holding that the order passed by Respondent u/s.14BA(d) of the Act, dt.07.04.2022 with DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/F1148N2O22- 2311042625022(1) and the notice dated 07.04.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act with DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148-1 12022-2311042646601(1) for the assessment year 201 5-16, as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without application of mind, and consequently set aside the same.

lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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.148 of the Act, d1.07.O4.2O22 for the assessment year 2015-16 with DIN& Notice No.lTBA/AST/51148-112022- 2311042646601(1) and all consequential proceedings there to. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A V RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITY AND THE HONOTIRABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAIUJI WRIT PEf,ITION No.5385 OF 2o24 ORDER:(per Ho n'ble Sri Justice P.SA"I[ KOSHY) Heard Sri A.V.Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Sundari R. Pisupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents. Perused the material on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been flled by the petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; "...to issue an order or direclion especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus holding that the order passed by Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated O7.04.2022 \tith DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST /F I t48Al2022-23 / to42625o 22(ll and the notice, dated 07.O4.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act with DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST I S I r48-L 12022-23 I 1042646 6O1(1) for ttre assessment year 2015-16 as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without application of mind and consequently set aside the same and pass..." 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which carne into effect from

2 PSK,J&.iIr&J W.P.IVo.5385 oJ 2024 OL.O4.2O2|, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148,{ and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn a-re also in a faceless manner. 4 . 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.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.09.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, learned Stalding 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.

3 PSK,J & I|J|nR,J W.P.iIo.5385 oJ2024 6. 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 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: "37. Th.e preliminary objection raised bg tla petitioner is sustained and all tlese urit petitions stands alloued on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of jurisdtction, ute are not inclined to proceed further and dectde tle other issues raised bg the petitioner which stands reserued to be raised and contended in an app rop iate proce e dtng s. " '38. Since th.e Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tlrc case of Asfush Aganaa| supra, as a one-time measure exercising th.e powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under th.e substituted prouisions, and thts Court allouLing tlrc petitions only on the procedural flatu, tle ight confered on the Reuenue would remain reserued to proeed further if theg so u)ant from the stage of th.e order of th.e Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarua| supra." 7. 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 t I I t

4 To, TJ KKS PSK,J& ]YTR,J I7.P.1Vo.5385 of 2024 accordance with the amended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the right of the parties 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. 9. Consequenfly, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. SD/. N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// tLl SECTION OFFICER 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1, 6-2-156/3, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503002. 2. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 110 003. 3. One CC to Sri A. V. Raghu Ram, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Sundari R Pisupati (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies b !

HIGH COURT DATED:2910212024 ORDER WP.No.5385 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS. F 1HE S14 16: o t + o (J o( za 0 4 APfl zut D€sPAT[:H EO I * @*.-'' kF I !

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →