Harini Podduturi vs. The Income Tax Officer

PDF · subscribers
WP/6111/2024HC TelanganaHBHC01011688202411 March 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 regarding the procedural irregularity. The Court held that the proceedings were not drawn in accordance with the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but under the un-amended provisions, which is unsustainable. The Court referred to its previous order in a batch of writ petitions (WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.09.2023), specifically paragraphs 37 and 38. Paragraph 37 stated that the preliminary objection regarding jurisdiction was sustained, and the impugned notices and orders were quashed on that ground, reserving other issues. Paragraph 38 clarified that the Revenue's right to proceed further, as permitted by the Supreme Court in Ashish Agrawal, would remain reserved. 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, Harini Podduturi, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated March 23, 2023, and a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that the amended provisions of the Act, effective from April 1, 2021, require the issuance of a notice under Section 148A and an opportunity of hearing before proceeding under Section 148. The petitioner argued that the reopening in this case was initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, which is contrary to the faceless assessment procedure under the amended provisions. The respondents, represented by the Senior Standing Counsel, did not dispute the petitioner's objection regarding the procedural irregularity but highlighted that other objections were also raised.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the Respondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2016-17 are illegal, arbitrary, and passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice without application of mind, particularly in light of the amended provisions of the Act effective from April 1, 2021? Assessee's Contentions: - The amended provisions of the Act require the issuance of a notice under Section 148A and an opportunity of hearing before proceeding under Section 148. - The proceedings under Section 148 were initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, contrary to the faceless assessment procedure under the amended provisions. - Relied on the judgment of the same Bench in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.09.2023. Revenue's Contentions: - The respondent-Department acknowledged that the objection regarding the procedural irregularity was decided in the aforesaid batch of Writ Petitions. - However, the Department contended that apart from the procedural objection, there were other various objections raised by the petitioner.

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) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO:6 111 oF 2024 Between: Harini Podduturi, W/o Sri Vijayender Reddy Konda aoed about 41 years' Villa No. os, Rsnoxa"nE M;i;6;'-6-;."laparrv noaa' Koinpailv' Hvderabad - 500014. Rep, by nJ|.'fJn"'"'"0'Cpn ffbfoer' Sri Suresh Reddv Podduturi' Slo Sri Venkat ReddY Podduturi, ...PETITIONER AND 1 The lncome Tax Officer' Ward - 12(1), Aayakar Bhawan' Basheerbagh' Hyderabad - 500004- 2. Assessment Unit, National Face - Department, Room No 4O1 '2'- Delhi less Assessment Centre, lncome Tax ir"oi, E Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith'theHighCourtmaybe 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 148A(d) of the Act' d1.23. 03. 2023 with DIN and Notice No ITBA/AST/F/148A12022- 23t1051202848(1 ) and the notice dated 23 03 2023 issued under section 148 of theActwithDlNandNoticeNoITBA/AST/S/1481t2o22-23/1051203010(1)forthe assessment year 2016- 17, 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 fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operation of the notice issued by the Respondent u/s. .r4g of the Act, dt 23 03. 2023 for the assessment year 2016- 17 with DIN and Notice No lrBA/AST/s/148 1r2o22- 23r1os12o3o1o('1 ) and ail consequentiar proceedings thereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. RAGHU RAM counsel for the Respondents: M/S vrJHAy K puNNA (sENroR sc FoR rrD) The Court made the following: ORDER

7 f ,,,. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI{ARAMJT WRIT PETITION No.6111 OF 2024 ORDER:/per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Rahu Ram, Iearned counsel for the petitioner ar-rd Mr.Vijhay K. Punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for respondents. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: "to poss dn order or direction especiolly one in the noture ol wRlT OF MANDAMUS holding thot the order possed by Respondent u/s 148Ad of the Act dt 23 03 2023 with DIN ond Notice No \TBA/AST/F/148A/2022 2j/10512O28481 ond the notice doted 23 03 2023 issued undet section 148 of the Act with DtN ond Notice No ITBA/AST/S/148 1/2022 2i/10512O30101 lor the dssessment yeor 2016 17 os being illegol orbitrory ond possed in gross violotion of principles of noturol iustice without opplicotion of mind ond consequently set oside the some ond poss such other order s os the Hon'ble Court deems fit ond proper in the interest of justice". 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended

6J :,7' 2 PSX,J & MrR,J W.P.No.67 71 ol 2024 provisions of the Act which came into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l , the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceiess manner. 4. Whereas, learned counsei 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 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 ,x PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.6777 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: "37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained and all these writ petitions stands allouLed on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed. on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner uhich stands reseraed to be raised and contended in art appropiate p roceeding s. " "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agan-u.tal, supra, as a one-time meosure exercising the pouers . under Article 142 of the Constitution of Indio, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under ttrc substituted prouisions, ond this Court allowing the petitions only on the proceduraL Jlaut, the right confered on the Reuenue tuould remain reserued to proceed further if they so uant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in tte case of Ashish Agaru-tal, supra." 7. In view of the same, 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. \ \ I l I i I I

a 4 PSK,J & MTR,J W.P.Na.6777 of 2024 To, B. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights 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' Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed' SD/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/I -V SECTION OFFICER The lncome Tax officer, Ward . 12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Basheerbagh, Hvderabad - 500004. Aisessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre lncome Tax Department, Room No 40i ?;d'Fi;;'t R;;p: Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium' Delhi 5i!"cc to sri A. V. Raghu Ram, Advocate tqPu-c]. 5'# 66 iI Hi'li. Viinrv (p,"i' ibiutoR SC ror lrD) [oPUCl Two CD CoPies 1 2 4 5 TJ GJP 6

I HIGH COURT DATED:1110312024 ORDER WP.No.6111 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. I 1tl i] T4I ( s. o -* aA o- J 2 B I,IA,r 2024 I (.) : , SJPATCY\ a 0{, ')9 *-

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →