Jagannath Sarangapani V. Union of India

WP/10651/2022

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Joannath Sarangapani challenging the reopening of his income tax assessment for the year 2014-15 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the reopening was illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, violating the principles of natural justice. The Income Tax Officer had issued a notice under Section 148, claiming that income had escaped assessment. The court heard arguments from both sides and allowed the petitioner to submit a representation against the reopening, which the department was directed to consider.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 721609 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: GKN Drivshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer & Ors
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B MUKHERJEE; RADHA KRISHNA
• Assessee Lawyers: KAILASH P S S
• Keywords: Arbitrary; Illegal; Re-opening of assessment; Without jurisdiction; Writ of Mandamus; Violative of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original J urisdiction) I 4ONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. VENKATESHWARA REDDY WRIT PETITIO N NO: 10651 OF 2022 2 Jaoannath Saranqapani, S/o Late 1r,4. Sarangapani, Aged about 54, R/o 8-2- 4OE, Road No. 6. Baniara Hills. Hyderabao 500034 aiO'rinatf, fi,luOu*bui 'srtunguparii, Slo Late lVl Sarangapani, Aged about 52, Rlo a-Z-+OA, Road No.6, Baniara Hills, Hyderabad -500034 ...,ETITIONERS Union of lndia, lVlinistry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue Rep by Secretary, North Block, New Delhi [ncome fax Officer, Ward 17(1), Hyderabad, Signature Towers, O-p-p- ^ ^ . botinicat Gardens, Serlingamp'ally-(tt/), R R. District. Hyderabad -500084 ...RESPONDENTS AND I 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, declaring the action of the respondent in re-opening the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2014-15 under section 147 of the lncome Tax Act, 196'1 as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction, and consequently set aside the Notice issued u/s 148 0f the IT Act d1.31 10312021 and the show cause notice dt.2310212022. Between: lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to stay further proceedings in relation to the re-opening of the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2014-15. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KAILASH NATH P'S'S' Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI B. MUKHERJEE FOR ini r.rlrvrnvnRApu RAJESHWARA RAO, ASSTSTANT SOLICtroR GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI RADHAKRISHNA SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. VENKATESHTTARA REDDY V.P.No.10651 of 2022 Order: t ,r t tor'h/t. ti Ir.ttrt t )1tt uhtod,) Heard Mr. Kailashnath P.S.S., leamed counsel for the petitioners; tr4r. B.Mukherjee, leamed counsel represenring leamed fusistant Solicitor General of India for respondent No.l,/Union of India and Mr. &rdhakrishna, leamed Standing C-ounsel for the Income Tax Depanment for respondent Nro.2. 2. Respondent No.2 has issued ' the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021, r-urder Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for shon 'the Act) for the assessment year 2Q14-2Q1.5. As per the impLrgned notice, respondent No.2 mentioned that he had reasons to believe that income tax of the petitioner cl.rargeable to tax for rhe assessment yar 2aI4-2015 has escaped ;lssessment within the meaning of Section 147 o{ the Act. Therefore, he proposed to assess/re-assess the income of the petitioner in the said asscssment year and in this connection, called upon the petitioner to submit the retums within thirty dals lrorn tl-re d;rte of ser-r,'ice of the n,:tice. / ) l Following the above, respondent No.2 issued show cause nou:e dated 08-02-2A22 as Per which, thc for reopening of 1e'.LSOnS assessment has been fumished to the petitioner' 4. On a query by the Coun as to whether Petitioner has filed any representation against the proposed action oi responclent No'2 on the basis of the reasons recorded, he submits th.-rt such representation has not been submitted 5. Lr view of tl.re lalv laid doxt by the Sr.tpren.re Coun in GKN DRMSHAFTS (INDIA) LTD., v. lncome Tax Officcr & orsl, we grant liberry to the petitioner to submit rePresentation against the proposed .acdon of respondent No.2 on the basis of the reasons recorded within a period of fifteen dap from today and if s''rch representation /objection is submitted, respondent No.2 shall consider the same and pass a speakiltg order, which shall be duly comm'-rnicated to the petitioner. ' (2003) 1 scc 72 6. TI.re above cxercise sl-rail be completed within a period of eight weeks frcm the date of receipt of the representarion/objection of the petltloner. However, we nrake it clear that in the event of default in making such an appiication /objection by the petitioner, it would be open to respondent No.2 to proceed with the impugned notice. 8. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Related interlocutory :rpplications, pending if any, stand disposed of. 7 9 . No costs. ,TRUE COPY' SD/-K.ONESIM ASSISTA REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, CHR BS $r 1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, lr,4inistry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue' North Block, New Delhi 2. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 17(1), Hyderabad, Signature Towers, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serlingampally (N/), R.R.Drstrict. Hyderabad -500084 3. One CC to Sri Kailash Nath P S S Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Namavarapu Rajeshwara Rao, Assistant Solicitor General IoPUC] 5. bne CC to Sri Radhakrlshna, SC for lncome Tax Department [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies 7. One Spare Copy ::3:: l I HIGH COURT DATED:2810212022 ORDER W.P.No.10651 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS n ,U h) r1- lAo[* "