F Mahendra Kumar Agarwal V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Hyderabad and The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 21

WP/12055/2023

AI Insights

The case involves F Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, the petitioner, challenging the orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Department under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were not conducted in accordance with the amended provisions of the Act, which came into effect on April 1, 2022, requiring faceless proceedings and an opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The respondents did not dispute the procedural flaws but contended that other objections raised by the petitioner were not addressed. The court referenced a similar case, WP.No.34493 of 2023, where it had allowed the writ petition on similar grounds, leading to the decision in favor of the petitioner in this case as well.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 676933 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WP.No.34493 of 2023, WP.No.25903 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUNDARI PISUPATI; K MAMATA
• Assessee Lawyers: DUNDU MANMOHAN
• Keywords: Faceless Proceedings; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 148A(d)

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI ;llf Between: f F Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, S/o, Late Shri Prabhu Dayal Agarual, Aged about 69 Years, # 24,8- 2- 41511 , Road No. 4, Barilaa Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana-500034. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Deputy Commissioner Of lncome Tax Circle 2(1), Hyderabad, 5'14, 5h Floor, Signature Towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serilingampally(M), Hyderabad, Telangana - 500084 The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax - 21.T. Towers, AC'Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana 500004 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appiopriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Order u/s 148A(d) of the Act, dl.O7lO4l2O22, passed by the 1st respondent and the consequent notice issued u/s 148 of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19, vide Document ldentification No.(DlN) ITBA/AST/F/148N2O22- 2311042642037('1 ), as void, illegal, and contrary to the Provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 2 i WRIT PETITION NO: 12055 OF 2023 all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Order u/s 148A(d) of the Act, dl.O7 .04.2022, passed by the '1 st respondent for A.Y. 2018-1 9, vide Document ldentification No.(Dltt)ii ITBtuAST/F/I48N2022- 23t1042642037 (1)and the ,ti consequent notice issuej'd u/s 148 of the Act, 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 injury. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) / M/s. K. MAMATA (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) The Court made the following: ORDER il ,1, ',, /i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJT WRIT PETITIO N No.12055 of2023 ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, 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 dated 27.12.2023. 2. In view of the fact that the identical matter has already been allowed by this Court, this Writ Petition also stalds allowed in terms of the order passed in W.P'No'34493 of 2023 decided on 27.12.2023 on similar terms. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs SD/. MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT BFGFTRAR //rRUE COPY// V SECTION OFFICER To,1 DeDutv Commissioner Of lncome Tax Circle 2(1), Hyderabad, 514, Sth Floor' S[-naiure Towers; Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Se-rilingampally(M), Hyderabad,. Telangana - 500084 z inJ iEncipat Gnimis'sioner of lncome Tax - 2 l -T. Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana 500004 e. One CC to Sri bundu Manmohdn, Advocate [OPUC] a one CC to M/s.lK Mamata, Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept [OPUC] s. One CC to M/s.lSundari R Pisupati (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept) [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPied g lffi (Along with the Orter Copy dt:27.12.2023 in W.P.No.34493 of 2023) lr I i TJ GJ HIGH COURT DATED:2310112024 ORDER WP.No.12055 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. lii rt', 'i 2 E nm yspa R o { ( U rt IHE SI4 ,6' rrt*O sn4v,; a ?rb ,{ Y THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.34493 0F 2023 ORDER:@er Ho n'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHE) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, \"the Act',) bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST /F /148A/2022-23 / 1o428s2132 (l), dated 26.04.2022 passed by respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2OI8-19 and the consequent notice under Section 14g of the Act, dated 26.0+.2022, bearing, DIN No.ITBA/AST / S / r48 _I / 2022-23 / i 0428s5 1 60 ( 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 O1.O4.2O27, 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 2 PSK,J & NTR,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,datedl4.Og.2023wheteinthisCourtdisposedofthe batch of writ petitions to the limited 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 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.34493 of 2023 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminarg objection raised by the petitioner is sustained and all these utrit petitions stands alloued on this uery jurisdictional 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 tLrc petitioner which stands reserued to be raised and contended in an appropriot e pro ceeding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court ollouLing the petitions onlg on the procedural flou, the ight conferred on the Reuenue uould remain reserued to proceed further if theg so utant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aganual, supra.\" 6. 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' 7. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is 4 PSK,J & NTR,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 KOSI{Y, J N. TUI(ARAMJI, J Date: 27.12.2023 TJMR "