Gutta Narasimha Reddy V. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 3 others

WP/26724/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Gutta Narasimha Reddy, the petitioner, who sought judicial intervention from the High Court of Telangana to address grievances related to an ex-parte decision by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. The petitioner argued that he was unable to present material evidence concerning his agricultural income sources, which supported his property investments, during the Tribunal's consideration of his appeal for the assessment year 2009-10. The High Court, after hearing the arguments, concluded that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner was to file an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, rather than seeking a writ of certiorari.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 691609 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 151 CPC, Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: JELLA NAGARAJ
• Keywords: Agricultural income; Ex-parte; Income tax appellate tribunal; Miscellaneous Application; Natural Justice; Property investment; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 254(2); 260A; 151; 226

Judgement Text

"I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO: 26724 OF 2022 Between: AND Gutta Narasimha Reddy, S/o G Sathi Reddy Age 50 yrs, Occ Business, Address B-10 Ramannapet (Villageand lr/landal), Yadhadhri Bhongir District- 508113 ...PETITIONER 'l . The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal and 3 othqrs, Bench-A, Hyderabad, Room No. 502,505 5'n Floor, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderlbad, pin' 500080 2. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax-2,1T Towers, A. C Guards, Hyderabad-50004 3. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals)-3, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad-500084 4. lncome Tax Officer, Ward-1, Suryapel5O8213 ...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 direct the Appellant respondent No 1 by issuing an order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari for remanding the petitioners case for consideration of evidence of agricultural income sources by his immediate family members support to the property investment by the petitioner on the ground that Petitioners case was ex-parte before the appellant Respondents No 1 and violating principals of natural justice. THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO Petition uncer Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed irr support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent N,r. 1 and 4 by remanding the petitioners case for consideration of evidence of agricultural income sources by his immediate family members support to the property investment by the petitioner on the ground that his case was ex- parte before the appellant Respondents No '1 pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI JELLA NAGARAJ Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V.PRASAD, SC for lncome Tax The Court made tlre following: ORDER lA NO: 1 OF 2022 I I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA ORDER: (Per lTon'ble Sn Justlce Ll jjal Bhugan) 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that due to inadvertence, he could not adduce material evidence belore the Income Tax authorities including the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A', Hyderabad (Tribunal) when his appeal was being considered being I.T.A.No.9S3/LIyDl2OlB (Gutta Narasimha Reddy vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Suryapet) lor the assessment vear 2009-lO. 3. We find lrom the materials on record that the said appeal was heard and decidcd by the Tribunal on Ol.OZ.2O2l { WRIT PETITION No.26724 of 2O22 Heard Mr. Jella Nagaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that seeking rectification of the order passed by the Tribunai, UB, J & SN,,] w.P.No.26724 of 2022 petitioner had filed miscellaneous application under Section 254(2 of the lncome Tax Act' 1961 (briefly referred to hereinafter zrs the .Act,) which r,l,ere dismissed by the Tribunal. 5. it is in such circumstances that the present writ petition has been filed seeking the relief as indicated above' 6. 'Jn due consideration' we are of the view that remedy of the petitioner lies in filing appeal under Section 26OA of tht: Act. Accordingl-y' we grant liberty to the petitioner to file such aPPeai' 7 . Subject to the above ' Writ Petition is disposed of' However, there shall be no order as to costs' 8. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending' if- any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed' SDLG.SIREESHA 2 ASSISTANTJ3EGISTRAR //rRUE coPY// secrlalk oFFlcER To, 3. Two C.D' CoPies 4. One SPare CoPY fi unc PS 1. One CC to SRI JELLA NAGARAJ' Advocate IOPUCI 2. One CC k) SRI J'V PRASAD' SC for lncome Tax [OPUC] I HIGH COURT DATED:23106t2022 ORDER WP.No.26724 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t |{e sTA ;\"C I E Al]E 2071 'i' L)l D' P- @ "