Dr. Samit Sekhar V. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)

WP/31421/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Dr. Samit Sekhar, a medical practitioner, who challenged an order by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) regarding his income tax assessment for the year 2018-19. The assessment order, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, assessed Dr. Sekhar's income significantly higher than expected, leading to a demand notice. Dr. Sekhar appealed this assessment and sought a stay on the recovery proceedings, which was partially granted with conditions by the Principal Commissioner. Dissatisfied with the lack of a comprehensive review in the stay order, Dr. Sekhar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking to declare the stay order as bad in law and against CBDT guidelines.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 753244 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 151 CPC, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B NARASIMHA SARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: DUNDU MANMOHAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Quasi judicial powers; Stay of Recovery Proceedings; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 143(3); 151; 156; 226; 220(6)

Judgement Text

"[3276 ] THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO: 31421 OF 2022 Between: Dr. Samit Sekhar, S/o Naresh Kumar Sekhar, Occ. Medical Doctor, Plot No. 269, Road No.78, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Pr. Commissioner of lncome Tax (Central), Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana-500004. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Aayakar Bhawan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana-500004. ,..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 issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the order passed by the 1't respondent vide Document ldentification Number (DlN)- ITBA/ RCV/ F/ 171 2022-231 1043984499 (1), dl. 21.O1 .2022 as bad in law and against CBDT guidelines and instructions; 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 the recovery proceedings till the disposal of first appeal filed before first appellate authority, and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of Substantial Justice as otherwise the Petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and in.iury. Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRl. DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: B NARASIMHA SARMA The Court made the following: ORDER HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN lA NO: I OF 2022 THE IC)N'BLE THE CTIII'F JUSTICE UJJA], B fIIJYT.N AND TH ) ]ION'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALT I I A YDT U'RIT PETITION No.3142I of 2Ci2 ORDER: (Pe tll. Horl'ble the Chief Justlcc Ltual Dltrq(nl Hea-r I Mr. Dundu Sashank MzLnre r ran, learned counsel fr r the petitioner and Mr. B.Nara s inrh;r Sarma, learned cc rnsel for the respondents. 2. By il ng this petition under Arti':le 221; of the Constiiut: rrL of lndia, petitioner has asstLi,r cl the legalit1, and valic tlr of the order dated 2l.07.'.lO'.1)' passed b1' responder t No.1 lor the assessmen! year 201B 19. 3. Peti ic,ner before us is a medical prac:ir ioner and is an asses e,l under the Income Tax Act., I !t(,1 (briefll', the Act' here n after) having the status.of in