Vishnuvardhan Reddy Muduganti vs. Income Tax Officer

I [ 337e 1 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, IHE 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: s391 OF 2024 Between: AND 1 Vishnuvard.han Reddy Muduganti, S/o; Late Sri Gopal Reddy, Aged. 54 years, M. Sri Vishnu Sadan, # 68 Villa Grade, Dandamudi Enclaie Road, pei Basheerabad, Beside RTA Office, Medchal Malkajgiri, Hyderabad - 500067 ...PETITIONER lncome Tax Officer, Ward 10(1),1 T Tower, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500004 The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax AP And TS, 1Orh Floor, C- Block, LT. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1,2nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. ...RESPONDENTS 2 3 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 issue an appropriate writ order or direclion more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned order dt.15.04.2O22 for A.Y. 2015-16 passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act vide DIN No. |TBA/AST/F|148A|2O22- 2311042746884(1) and the consequential notice u/s 148 d1.15.O4.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl148-112022- 2311042747133(1), for A Y. 2015-16, issued by the JAO(1st respondent) instead of FA0(3'd respondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice.

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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice u/s 148 dt.1s.04.2022 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/148 112022- 23t1042747133(1) issued by the .1.1 Respondent(JAO) for A.Y. 2015-16 instead of 3'd respondent (FAO). Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VtJHAy K PUNNA (SEN|OR SC FOR ITD) The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TTIKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.5391 OF 2o24 ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Sri Dundu Manmohan, Iearned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vrl ay K. Punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for the respondents. Perused the material on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been frled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; "...to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order, dated 15.04.2022 for A.Y. 2015-16 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act uide DIN No.ITBA/AST /F / l48A/ 2022-23 /1O42746a84(I) and the consequential notice under Section 148, dated 15.04.2022 uide DIN No. ITBA/ AST/ S/ L 48 _r / 2022 -23 / ro427 47 L 33 (1) for A.Y. 2015-16 issued by the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO (3d respondent) as void, illegal and contrary to the provisions of lncome Tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice and pass..." J. in One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which carne into effect from

2 PSj(,J & ,lu[R,J W.P.No.539t oJ 2024 Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148A and provide ar opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless marrner. 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.259O3 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. \ 5 On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- Department objection was decided does not dispute that the said in the aforesaid batch of Writ Petitions. However, he further contended that apart from the aforesaid objection, there have been other various objections a.lso which the petitioner has raised in the writ petition.

J PSK,J& ATTR,J W.P.No,5397 of 2024 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: I It I "37. The prelimtnary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustatned and all th-ese u,trit peiitions sfands allowed on this uery juisdtctional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on th.e point of juisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decide th.e other issues raised bg the petitioner tahich slands reserued to be raised and contend.ed in on approp rtate procee ding s. " "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court Lnd, in tle case of Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising tLe pouters under Article 142 of th.e Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allowing the petitions only on tlLe procedural flaw, the ight confened on tle Reuenue would remairt reserued to proceed further if theg so utant from tlrc stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aganaal, supra." 7. In view of the same, we ar€ 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

4 PSK,J& irr&J W.P.No.5397 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 & 3g of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. 1 //TRUE COPYII SD/. N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR H' To, SECTION OFFICER lncome Tax Officer, Ward 10(1 ),1 T Tower, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500004 The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Ap And Ts, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110003. One CC to Sri Dundu Manmohan, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sn Vijhay K Punna (SENIOR SC for ITD) [OPUC] Two CD Copies 1. 2. 3. 4 5 6 TJ KKSI

ri t HIGH COURT DATED:2910212024 ORDER WP.No.5391 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. @r'6'e oB lytE S14 ..: 3 04 ApH,lfft o ,I. ( * o PAT C * ttE0 I