Dhanalaxmi and Company V. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Delhi and The Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad

WP/6893/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Dhanalaxmi and Company, represented by its managing partner Mr. Mohammed Yaqub, challenging the orders issued by the Income Tax Department under the un-amended provisions of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the reassessment orders were arbitrary, illegal, and violated several provisions of the Act including Sections 148, 149, and 151A, as well as the circulars issued by the CBDT. The respondents, represented by Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, did not dispute the procedural flaws but highlighted other objections raised by the petitioner. The court referenced its earlier decision in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, which had similar jurisdictional issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 798718 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal case
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, Section 148.4 of the Act, Section 148 of the Act, Section 149 of the Act, Section 151A of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Procedural Flaw; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 149; 144B; 151A; 226; 148.4

Judgement Text

"[ 337s ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH 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: 6893 OF 2024 Between: Dhan^alaxmi and Company, Shop No.168, Sri Krupa lvlarket, Ivlalakpet, Hvderabad _ s.uuu3tt. Rep.. by its lvlanaging partner, fvlr. tvlohammed yaqub, S/o. 'Mr. Ir/ohd Kareem. ...PETITIONER AND 1 2 Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, l /inistry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Flobr, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Sladium, Delhi - 1 '10 003. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad, l.T. Towers, A_C. Guards, [ 4asabtank, Hyderabad_ ...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 MANDAlvlus holding that the order passed by lst Respondent uls. 147 r.w.s i44 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dt.12.o2.2024 with DtN No.trBA/AST/s114rt2o23- 2411060770967( 1 ) for the Ay.2018-19, as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void atr initio, apart from being violative of provisions of section '14gA and section 149 of the Act and also contrary to the circular issued by cBDT and pmvisions of section 1 51A of the Act, and consequently set aside the order passed by 1 st Respondenr u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 r.w_s 1448 of the Act, d1.12.O2.2O24 with DIN No.ITBA/AST/S114712023-2411060770962(1) for the Ay.2018-19 and ail consequential proceedings pursuant thereto. 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, including any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 1st Respondent u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, dt.12.O2.2O24 with D I N No. ITBA/A ST I S t 1 47 t 2023 -241 1 0607 7 0967( 1 ) fo r the Av. 20 1 B- 1 9 Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: Ms.B.SAPNA REDDY, Sr.S'C FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE P.SAM KOSI{Y AND THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.6893 OF 2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Raghu Ram, Iearned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.B.Sapna Reddy, 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 Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief \"to poss on order or direction especiolly one in the noture of WRlf oF MANDAMLIS holding thdt the order passed by 1't Respondent u/s 747 r.w.s 744 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, dt.12.02.2o24 with OIN No: ffBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1060770967(1) Ior the Av.2018-19, os arbitrory, illegot, bod in low, void ob initio, oport from being violotive of provisions of section 748A ond section 149 ol the Act ond olso controry to the circulot issued by CBOT ond provisions of section 151A of the Act, ond consequently set oside the order possed by 7't Respondent u/s. 747 r.w.s 744 r.w.s 7448 of the Act dt.72.O2.2024 with DIN No: tTBA/AST/s/147/2023-24/106o770967(1) lor the Ay.2O78-19 ond oll conseque nti ol procee d i ngs pursuont the reto..\" 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended 2 provisions of the Act which carne into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148.4 and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are a-lso 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.259O3 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.O9.2023 u.herein this Court disposed of the batch of u.rit 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 r.r,hich the petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 3 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. TlLe preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner rs sustained and all tlese wit petitions stands alloued on this uery juri.sdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of juisdiction, we ore not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised bg tlrc petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an appropiate proceeding s.' \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court lnd, in ttte case of Ashish Agarual, supro, os a one-time measure exercising the pouers under Article 142 of tlne Constitution of India, pertnitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allouing tLrc petitions onlg on tlrc procedurol flaut, ttrc ight confened on the Reuenue uould remain reserued to proceed furtlner if they so want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in tle cose of Ashish Agaru-,o| supra.\" 7. In 'r-iew of the satne, 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 4 8. As has been held by this Bench in the afore said 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. To, //TRUE COPY// The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Mrnistry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 . 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 110 003. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad, l.T. Towers, A.C. Guards, Masabtank, Hyderabad. One CC to SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM, Advocate. IOPUC] One CC to SRI B.SAPNA REDDY. (SC FOR INCOME TAX). IOPUC] Two CD Copies. SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY ASSrsrANr REqtsrRAR i L/ /L_. SECTION OFFICER 1 2 3 4 BSK ttc &g HIGH COURT DATED:1810312024 ORDER WP.No.6893 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o o 22 APB 2024 oT 1HE S14 ,4- * €.s.ATCHr--O ( tt ( 7. C, -$ + E "