Vumma Reddy Satyanarayana Reddy vs. Income Tax Officer

[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P,SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 6538 OF 2024 Between AND 1 2 3 Vumma Reddy Satyanarayana Reddy, S/o Raii Reddy, A999 !7 years' H.No. 2-7t4t2, Saleh Nagar, Rekurthi, Karimnagar, Telangana - 505451 ...PETITIONER 4 lncome Tax Officer, Ward 2, Aayakat Bhavan, Near Natral Theatre' Karimnagar, Telangana -505001 The Prin-cipal Chiel 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 , 2fid Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. The irrincipal Chief Commissioner, of lncome Tax AP and TS, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.G. Guards, Hyderabad'500004. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401 , Znd Floor, E- Rarnp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium. Delhi-1 10003 ...RES'ONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndra praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt. 20 02-2024 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 r.w.s '1448 of the lncome-tax Act for A Y' 2015-16 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST lsl147l2O23- 2411061200639( 1 ), which is passed as a consequence of the order passed u/s 148A(d) dl.O7 -O4.2O22 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/F/14 8A12022-2311042613238( 1 ) and the notice u/s 148 dt.07.O4.2022 vide DIN No. ITBtuAST/S l148-112022- 2311042647139( 1 ), issued by the JAo(1't respondent) instead of FAo(3rd respondent), as void, illegal, and

contrary to the provisions of lncome tax Act and conlrary to the Principles of Natural J us ticc lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the atfidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order dt. ZO.OZ.2O24 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 r.w.s '1448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.y. 2015-16 vide DIN No ITBA/AST/S114712023-2411061200639(1 ), Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.6538 OF 2024 ORDER:(per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHfi) Heard Mr.Dundu Manmohan, Iea_rned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Sundari R Pasupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel 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: 1o issue an appropriate writ order or direction more partrcularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Assessment Order dt 20 02 2024 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 747 r w s 1448 of the lncometax Act for A Y 2015-16 vide DtN No ITBA/AST/S/1a7I2023 24 /106-1,2006391, which is passed as a consequence of the order passed u/s 148Ad dt4744-2o22 vide DIN No |TBA / AST / F / L48A / 202223 / 10426132381. and the notice u/s 148 dt 07 04 2OZ2 vide DtN No ffgA/AST/5/1481/2022 23/LO426471391 issued by the JAO 1'1 respondent instead of FAo3rd respondent as void illegal and contrary to the provisions of lncome tax Act and contrary to the principles of Natural Justice ". 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended

2 PSI(,J & MTR,J W.P.No.6538 ol 2024 provisions of the Act \,vhich came into effect from OI .O4.2021, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 14BA 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 faceless marrner. 4. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in thc instant case, reopening has been initiated b1, thc Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. In support of his contention, hc relied upon the recent judgment rendered by this very Bench in WP.No.259O3 of 2022 & batch, dated 1 4.O9.2023 u,herein this Court disposed of the batch of rr.,rit petitions to thc 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. Horvevcr, hc furLher contended that apart from the aforesaid objection, there have been other various objections also rvhich thc petitioner has raised in the writ pet1t1on.

3 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.6538 oJ 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 oll these wit petitions stonds allou.ted on this uery jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices antd orders are getting quoshed on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed furtter and decide the other issues roised by tLrc petitioner uthich slands reserued to be roised and contended in an appropriate proceeding s. " "38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Aganual, supra, as a one-time measure exercising tLe pouters under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouistons, and this Couft allouting the petitions onlg on the procedural flatu, the right confened on the Reuenue utould remain reserued to proceed further if they so uant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Courl in tlLe case of Ashish Agan-utal, 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 accordance with the amended provision but under the un-amended provision r.rrhich is othenvise not sustainable. I I

4 PSK,J & ]YTR,J W.P.No.6538 oJ 2O24 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties wouid 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. //TRUE COPY// To, BM SB SD/-K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIdN OFFICER '1 . The lncome Tax Ofticer, W ard ?' Aayakar Bhavan' Near Natraj Theatre, Karimnagar, Telangana -505001 z ifrJ Criniipal Chiei Commissioner of lncome Tax Ap And Ts, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. a - ftre Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National . F-aceless - ]qssJssment Centre, Delhi, tr/inistry of Finance, Room No' 4O1, 2nd Floor, E- Ramo. Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. +. fnJ Fiinclpal Chref Commissioner, of lncome Tax AP and TS, 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T.'Towers, 10-2-3, A.G. Guards, Hyderabad-500004 ' 5. irre 'nssessmen[ Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless -' Aiiessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 , znd Floor, E- Ranro. Jawaharlal Neltru Stadium. Delhi-1 10003 o. One bC to SRl. DUNDU MANIMoHAN, Advocate [oPUC] 7. One CC to NI/s. SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies

I HIGH COURT DATED:1310312024 ORDER WP.No.6538 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITION WITHOUT COSTS l ri r- S'i,,\ r c+ G 1 E tlAY 2024 c- o ,; F.4 T Cii @c"('* -.\" (,