Aruna Mula, W/o. Bhasker Reddy and Srinivasa Rao Vemulapalli, S/o Venkata Rao Vemulapalli V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 12(1) and The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax AP and TS and The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

WP/314/2024

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by Aruna Mula and Srinivasa Rao Vemulapalli against the Income Tax Department officials challenging the assessment orders and notices issued for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2015-16, respectively. The petitioners argued that the orders were issued under the un-amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, which is contrary to the requirements set by the amended provisions that mandate faceless proceedings and proper notice under Section 148A. The court referenced a similar case (W.P.No.34493 of 2023) where it had already ruled in favor of the petitioners on similar grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 796535 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.34493 of 2023, WP.No.25903 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD; B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: DUNDU MANMOHAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 148A(d); 1448; 226

Judgement Text

"[ 337s ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY HE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY rHE HoNouRaeLe sAtNfl sncE N.TuKARAMJt WRIT PETITION NOs: 314 and 37I OF 2024 WRIT PETITION NO: 314 0F 2024 Between: Aruna Mula, W/o. Bhasker Reddy, Aged 41 years, H.No.1_2_14lBC/i 6, Ketri |;,Sd3[, Brundavan cotony, Rijendii rvrdri nr\"g\"oodv, reL;s;;;'j ...PETITIONER AND 1 2 3 The lncome Tax Officer. Ward - 12(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. LB Stadium, Basheer Bhag, Hydera bad, Tetangan';'l 50bb&.' \"\"\" \" The.Principal Chief Commis-siorrel of lncome Tax Ap and TS, 1Oth Floor, C_ Block, t.T. Towers, 10- 2-3, A. C. Cuaras, fryi.;'b;j StOOOa. Th\" Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment centre- Derhi Ministry-of.Flna\"1-iil'dil'' rr. 1o1, 2ndFroor, E- Ramp, Jawahadat Nehru Staoium,bLirri- ilobdj'\"\"\"' \" ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the Hagh court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particurarry one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt. 15.12.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 r. w. s 144 read with section 1448 of the rncorne- tax Act for A'Y'2016'1r vide DrN No. 'rBA/ASTlst14tt2o23-24/105ss10868(1), which is passed as a consequence of the proceedings under 147 r. w. s 14g wherein the order dt. 31. 03. 2023 passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act vide DIN No. lTBA/AST/F/14 BAt2o22- 23/1os1785g49( 1) ancr the consequentiar notice u/s 148 dt. 31.03.2023 vide DtN No. |TBA/AST tst14B_1t2O22_ 2311051800889( 1), for A. Y.2016-17, issued by the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO(3rd 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 24 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 o the Assessment order dt. 15j2.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 t . w. s 1 44 read with section 1 448 of the lncome- tax Act for A.Y.2016-17 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14712023- 2411058810868(1), and may pass such other order(s) as the Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the interests of substantial justice, as otherwise the Petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and severe iniury' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V.PRASAD, SC FOR INCOME TAX / M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY, SC FOR INCOME TAX WRIT PETITION NO: 379 OF 2024 Between: AND 1 Srinivasa Rao Vemulapalli, aged 56 years, S/o Venkata- Rao Vemulapalli, 402 A ero\"L Saptami Heights, trtR'i Cobn!, Pragathi Nagar, Nizampet' Hyderabad, Telangana - 500090 ...PETITIONER lncome Tax Officer, Ward 12(1 , Aayaka( Bhavan, Opp L.B. Stadium, Basheer Bhag, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500004 The Princioal 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 Cenke, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401 , 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 direction, more particularly one in ,-- ) the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Order dt. 25.O4.2022 fo( A.Y.2015-16 passed u/s 148A(d)of the Actvide DIN No. ITBA/AST/F1148A12022- 23110428457 52(1) and the consequential notice u/s 148 dt. 25.O4.2O22 vide DIN No.lTBA/ASTiSl148_112022-2311042846437(1) issued by the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO(3rd 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.25-O4.2022 vide DIN No. ITBAJAST/S/1 48 _1 12022-231 1042846437 (1 ) issued by the 1 st Respondent(JAO) for A.Y. 2015-16 instead of 3rd respondent(FAO), and may pass such other order(s) as the Honorable Court deems fit and proper in the interests of substantial .justice, as otherwise the Petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and severe in.ju ry. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V.PRASAD, SC FOR INCOME TAX / M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY, SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER TIIE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE P'SAM KOSHY AND TIIE IION,BLE SRI JT'STICE N'TUKARAMJI W.P.Nos .314 and 379 of 2024 COMMON Of,LDER: {pe' no n'ble Sri Justice P'sAttf KosHYl When these matters are taken up for hearing today' it has been informed by the parties that an identical Writ Petition i'e'' W.P.No.34493 of 2023 has already been allowed and disposed of uide order, d,ated 27 '12'2023' ) In view of the fact that the identical matter has already been To, 1. 2. 3 Two CD CoPies (Along with the copy of order dated 27 122O23 ' BSR GJP allowed by this Court, we are inclined to allow these Writ Petitions in terms of the order passed in W'P'No'34493 of 2023 decided on 27 - 12 '2023 on similar terms 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in these Writ Petitions, sl\"'all stald closed' No order as to costs' SD,.V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/' 5,,. SECTION OFFICER *'tffi H# 4 5 6 7 in W.P.No.34493 ol 2O231 'l I HIGH COURT DATED: 0510112024 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.314 and 379 of 2024 ( o $6 STAI G. e o o 1 3 FEB 2024 rj * Espt.ta'.'' )- -r\" ALLOWING BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS, WITHOUT COSTS M q I A ) 'w)4 I I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.34493 OF 2023 ORDER:@er Ho n'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant Writ Petition has been Iiled 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 1 (for short, \"the Act\") bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST lF / r48Al2022-231 1)428s2r37 (1), dated 26.O4 .2022 passed by respondent No. I for the assessment year 2O18-19 and the consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 26.04.2022, bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST / S/ r48_t / 2o22-2s I 10428ss160 (1) 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 required to issue notice under Section l48A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the 2 PSX,J& iVTR,J W.P.No.34493 of 2O23 assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. 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.25903 of 2022 &\" batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the Iimited 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 PSI(,J d6 lUfR,J W.P.No.34493 oJ 2023 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: \"37. TtE preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustained and all ttese uit petitions stands allowed on thi-s uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned noties and orders are getting quasled on tle point of jurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed furtLer and decide the oth-er issues raised by the petitioner u.thich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an appropriate proceeding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tte case of Ashish Aga rutal, supra, as a one-time measure exerci.sing the poraers under ArticLe 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allouing tLrc petitions only on tLrc procedural Jlaut, tlrc right conferred on the Reuenue u.tould remain reserued to proceed further if theg so uant from the stage of the order of tle Supreme Couft in the case of Ashish Agaruol, supra.\" 6- In view of the S?rrr€, wc 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. 7. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is 4 PSI(,L[ & M[R,J W.P.No.34493 of 2023 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 P.SAM KOSHY, J N. TUKARAMJI, J Date: 27.12.2023 TJMR "