HES - Gayatri Banjara Hills, H Venkata Rama V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 6(1), I.T. Towers, A.C. Guards, Masabtank, Hyderabad - 500004 and Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110003

WP/1703/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by HES - Gayatri Banjara Hills against the Income Tax Officer and the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, challenging an assessment order and a demand notice for the assessment year 2021-22. The petitioner argued that the orders were illegal, arbitrary, and violated principles of natural justice and the prescribed procedure under the Act. The respondents contested the writ petition, emphasizing the availability of an appellate remedy. The High Court, after hearing both parties, decided not to entertain the writ petition, citing the existence of a statutory remedy of appeal and the need for factual determination, which is beyond the scope of writ jurisdiction.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 819386 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 143(3) of the Act, Section 156 of the Act, Section 1448 of the Act, Section 151 CPC
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Demand notice; Natural Justice; Statutory remedy of appeal; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 143(3); 151; 1448; 156

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI I WRIT PETITION NO: 1703 OF 2024 Between: HES - Gayatri Banjara Hills, H Venkata Rama AND 1 The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 6(1), l.T. Towers, A.C. Guards, Masabtank, Hyderabad - 500004. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,Delhi-1 10003. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Afticle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances slated 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 MANDAMUS holding that the order passed by 2nd Respondent u/s.143(3) of the AcL d1.28.12.2023 with DIN No . ITBA/AST/S/1 43 (3)12023-24110591233S0(1) and the demand notibe dated 28.12.2023 issued under section 156 of the Act with DIN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/S 115612023-2411059123436(1) for the assessment year 2021-22, as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violation of principles,of natural iustice violating the procedure prescribed under section 1448 of the Abt, and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Sec{ion '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 demand raised by the 2nd Respondent by issuing notice u/s.156 of the Ac| dt.28.12.2023 for the assessment yeat 2021-22 with DlNand Notice No ITBA\"/A ST/S/1 5612023-2411O59123436( 1 ) and all consequential proceedings thereto. t NCC (JV), Plot No.39, B.N. Reddy Cotony, Road No.14, yderabad - 500034. Rep., by its Authorised Signatory, lndukuri Krishnam Raju S/o. Janaki Rama Raju lndukuri. ...PETITIONER 2 lil I Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.V. RAGHU RAM r1 Counsel for the Rbspbndents: SRI J.V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) It The Court made the fbllowing: ORDER 'I TIIE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI w.P. No. 17O3 of2024 ORDER: per Ao n'bte Sri Justice P.SAM KoSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Raghu Ram, Iearned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondents' Perused the material available on record. 2. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of assessment dated O6.09-2022, passed by the 2\"d respondent' 3. At outset, this Bench is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition for a simple reason that the petitioner has a remedy of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The reason this Bench is decline to entertain the writ petition is that all the grounds that the petitioner is harping upon are all the grounds which would require the appreciation of thc factual matrix of the case and also record of the proceedings before the authority concerned, which perhaps while exercising the writ jurisdiction in a challenge to the impugned order may not be permissible. 4. [n view of the same, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal. Accordingty, this writ petition stands dismissed, reserving the right of the petitioner to avail the remedy ol appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). No order as to costs. I I 2 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if arry, shall stald closed //TRUE COPY// SD/-T.JAYASREE *'''^':l^Tff:T: I SECTIOIT OFFICER To, BN SB 1. 9n\" 99 to SRt A.V. RAGHU RA[it, Advocate IOPUCI ? 9n\" 99 to SRt J.v. pRASAD tsc FoCl.rdoi,E iiil topuct 3. Two CD Copies il il I r I I J I I I HIGH COUR I T l * I I ii I l l ,l 2024 I I 0 DATED:241 1t ORDER WP.No.170 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS h i ll I i n 3 2024 .i i , i i i* r'l * riil .! I * ttt tlt bf i t1 I .=:= tE. S14 15 ,r t + /.) 7 6 liir, nl ^) ll it fr I i Ee e-L i i, F r l I r)- %\", "