Gaddam Praveen Kumar Reddy V. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre and Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1 and Union Of India, Ministry of Finance

WP/33345/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Gaddam Praveen Kumar Reddy, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against the Assistant Director of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre, and other respondents, seeking the court's intervention to direct the respondents to acknowledge and process the self-assessment taxes and tax collected at source (TCS) reflected in FORM 26AS of TRACES for the assessment years 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2022-23. The petitioner argued that the respondents had not considered these credits and had failed to process the eligible refunds, which he claimed was illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory. The respondents contended that the petitioner's PAN was listed among fraudulent PANs, which hindered the processing of his claims. However, the petitioner provided evidence that he had responded to the queries regarding this listing. The court, after reviewing the submissions and evidence, directed the respondents to take appropriate actions regarding the petitioner's claims.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 814329 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUNDARI R PISUPATI; B KAVITA YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAM
• Keywords: Self-assessment taxes; Tax collected at source; TRACES; Writ of Mandamus; FORM 26A5; Eligible refunds; Fraudulent PANs list
• Section: 26A5

Judgement Text

"r:.,$.j,@; .t-ft '\"lit\". [ 3379 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI wRlT PETITION NO:3334s OF 2023 Between: Gaddam Praveen Kumar Reddy, S/o. Sri Gaddam Narayan Reddy, Aged about 56 years, Flat No 403 Raghavendra Residency Beside Vijay Public School Mubaraknagar, Nizamabad - 503003 ...PETITIONER AND 1 Assistant Director of lncome Tax, Central Processing Centre, Post Bag No.2, Electronic City Post Office, Bangalore - 560500 lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1 , 6- 2- 156/3, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad. Union Of lndia, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001, Rep., bY its secretary ...RESP.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 writ especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus holding that the action of the Respondents in not considering the self assessment taxes paid and credits available to the Petitioner in the form of tax collected at source (TCS) which are reflected in FORM 26,45 of TRACES and in not processing the eligible refunds to the Petitioner for the asst. years 2020-21 , 2021-22 and 2022-23 as being illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory, and consequently direct the Respondents to give credit for the tax collection at source and issue eligible refunds for the Ay. 2020-21 , Ay. 2021-22 and Ay. 2022- 23 to the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.V. RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: M/s. SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr. SC FOR INCoME TAx) Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Mrs. B. KAVITA YADAV The Court made the following: ORDER 2 J I I I t! i] THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAIU KOSIrY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKAR3MJI W.P. No. 33345 of 2023 Q!pp!:1per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Raghuram, learned counsel lbr the petitioner; Mrs. Sundari R Pisupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for respondent Nos.l ar,.d 2; Mrs.B.Kavita Yadav, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 and perused the entire record. 2. The instant writ petition has been hled seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider grant of credit for th.e tax collected at source (TCS) and issue eligible refunds for the Assessment Year 2O2O-21, 2O2l-22 and 2022-23 to the peLitioner. 3. The grievance of the petitioner substantially goes to show that the respondents are not considering the self asse:isment taxes paid and credits available to the petitioner in respect of the tax collected at source (TCS) u,hich are reflected in FORM 26A5 ol' TRACES and not processing the eligible refunds u'hich the petiLioner is entitled for the aforementioned three assessment years. 4. On the previous date o[ hearing, learned counsel for the Department is directed to seek instructions and file counter affidavit. I i I I ! i : i I 2 5. The Counter affrdavit has been filed, wherein, it has been stated that the assessee PAN was placed in the Fraudulent PANs list and with regard to the same, a letter datd 17.O4.2O23 was issued seeking. informa[ion in respect of the details of deductions and exemptions claimed by the assessee. It has also been informed that the respondents have taken stand, but the assessee has not availed the opportunity for furnishing the necessar5l information in terms of the information sought uide letter dated L7.O4.2O23. Therefore, a favourable report for delisting of the assessee Pan {rom the Fraudulent PANs list could not be sent to CIT, CPC (ITR). 6. However, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the Document Ex.P11, stating that the petitioner had already submitted his explanation in terms of the letter dated 17.04.2023. According to the petitioner, his explanation was made along with all supporting documents on 22.06.2023 as would be evident from the Acknowledgement Number that is available on Ex.Pl1 and though the same has been hled securely on 22.06.2023, there does not seem to be any further action on the part of the respondents in considering this response given by the petitioner. 7 . Today, learned counsel for the Department submits that subject to verif-rcation of fact if the said reply dated 22.06.2023 is available u'ith them, the-y shalt immediately process, consider and pass appropriate orders at the earliest. ,' ! : I i I t I 1 i I 3 8. In view of the submissions made by the learnerl counsel for the Department, we are of the considered opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated by this Court in the lilght of the reply that the petitioner has furnished on 22.06.2023. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to take appropriate steps at the earliest in considering the PAN of the petitioner being delisted from the Fraudulent PANs List and also consider the self-assessment taxes paid and credits avaiiable with the petitioner as is reflected in FORM 26A5 of TRACES and further process the petitioner: for the eligible refunds that he is entitled for. Let this entire exercise be concluded within a period four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pendirrg, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N.SRIHARI ASSISTANT ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// C SECTION OFFICER To, 1 Assistant Director of lncome Tax, central Processing cerrtre, Post Bag No.2, Electronic City Post Office, Bangalory-.-5QO!Q0 . .. nio*e ii, dtficer, Ward - 1, 6-2-'156/3' Subhash Nagar Nizamabad' ii;5;\"6irt, union or lndia, Ministrv of Finance, Nohh Block, New Delhi - 1 10001 One CC to SRI A.V. RAGHU RAItil, Advocate IOPUCI One CC to lril/s. B. KAVITA YADAV, Advocate [OPUC] on; aa io Mtr. sur.ronRt R PlsuPATl (sr sc FoR INCoME TAX) toPUCl Two CD Copies 2 J 4. 5. 6. 7. BN GJ tD. HIGH COURT DATED:1410212024 q ./../ ('\"-r-' t- t1 $ o |} s .'.*'..-,. ORDER WP.No.33345 ot 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 9 % ,[' ;,'/ "