M/s. Kalptaru Investments Pvt. Ltd. V. Union of India and 3 Others

WP/20472/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Kalptaru Investments Pvt. Ltd., which filed a writ petition against the Union of India and other respondents challenging the notices and orders issued under Section 148 and Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that these notices were arbitrary, illegal, and issued without jurisdiction, violating the principles of natural justice and the procedural requirements of the Income Tax Act. The High Court, referencing a similar case decided on 14.09.2023, found in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the notices and orders while allowing the Department to take further actions as deemed necessary.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725177 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.25903 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B MUKHERJEE; K MAMATA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREYA DEVAKI
• Keywords: Arbitrary action; Illegal notice; Income tax notice; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 149; 151; 148A(d)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION NO:204720F 2022 [ 33861 the provisions of to 6, 1st Floor, its Director, Mr. ...PETITIONER Between: M/s. Kalptaru lnvestments Pvt. Ltd., A comoany incoroorated under the Companies Act, 1956, Having its reilistered oifice at 44-3 lqlpnka[ Street, Secunderabad, -Telang€na - 500003, Rep by Subhash Baheti. AND 1. 2 3 4 Union of lndia,-Ministry of.Finance (lncome Tax Dept), .15, Safdarjung Road, New Delhi - 110029, Rep. by its Secretary. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi - 1 10001 , Rep. by its Chairperson. Principal Commissioner of _lncome Tax, lncome Tax Departnrent, Signature Towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy. No. 37 (p) c;f Kothaouda-. Ooo. qgla^qical Gardens. Serlingampally (M), Rangareddy, Hyderabad, ietangarid - 500084. hcome Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1),lncome Tax Department, Signature Towers, Qy l.to. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy. No. 37 (P) of'Kothaguda,-Opp. Botanicai Gardens, Sedingampally (M), Rangareddy, Hyderabad, Tehngani - 500084. ...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 pass an order or orders, direction or a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS to a. Declare the action of the Respondent No. 4 in issuing notice dated 1510412021 uis 148 of the lT Act (bearing Document ldentification No. ITBA/ASPSI14812021-2211032441315(1)) without following the procedure under Section 1484 of the lT Act and providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of principles of natural justice, Section 1484 and Section 149 ot the lncome Tax Act, 1961 , and consequently set aside the same. b. Declare the notice daled 2910612021 (bearing Document ldentification No- ITB AtASTlFll43(21412121' 22t1033852532(1)) and Order dated 241'1112021 (bearing Document ldentification No. ITBA/ASTlFl1712021-2211037203774(1)) issued by Respondent No. 4 to the Petitioner in furtherance to the notice dated 1510412021 (bearing Document ldentification No. lTBtuASTlsl14812021-2211032441315(1)) as arbitrary, illegal' and consequently, quash the same, c). \"Declare the Notice daled 3O.O7.2022 issued under Section 148 and Order dated 3O.O7.2022 (bearing DIN and Order No. ITBA/COMlFl1712022'2311044343635(1 )) issued under Section 148A(d) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 by Respondent No. 4 to the Petitioner as without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, void, time-barred, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 and consequently, set aside the same. (Prayer is added as per the order, dt: 29.O9.2023 vide l.A.No.2/23) lA NO: 1 OF 20 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 suspend the operation and effect of Notice dated 1510412021 (bearing Document tdentification No. ITBA/AST/S/14812021-2211032441315(1)), Notice dated 2glo6t2o21 (bearing Document ldentification No. ITBA/ASTlF1143(2)-412021' 2211033852532(1)) and order dated 2411112021 (bearing Document ldentification No. |TBA/ASTtFt17t2O21-22t1037203774(1)) issued by Respondents No. 4 to the Petitioner. 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 nuy be pleased to stay all further proceedings in relation to the Notice daled 3o107t2o22 issued under Section 148 and Order dated 3OlO7l2O22 (bearing DtN and Order No. ITBA/COM/F/I712022- 2311044343635(1)) issued under Section 148A(d) of the lncome Tax Act. 1961 by Respondent No. 4 to the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SHREYA DEVAKT Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : SRt B.MUKHERJEE, SENTOR COUNSEL Counsel for the Respondent No.2TO4 : Ms.K.MAMATA, Sr.SC FOR tT DEPT The Court made the following: OROER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSTTY AND TIIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.2O472 of 2022 ORDER:per ao n'ble Sn Justrce. P.SAM KoSI/lf) Heard Ms. Shreya Devaki, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Mukherjee, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1 and Ms. K. Mamata, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it has been informed that one of the preliminary objections raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition has been recently answered by this Division Bench in a batch of matters, the leading case being W.P.No.259O3 of .2022 which stood decided vide order dated 14.O9.2023. 3. In view of the said decision from this Division Bench and since the preliminary objection in the present writ petition being the same, the instant writ petition also deserves to be and is allowed .on similar terms. As a consequence, the impugrred notice and the consequential orders stands set aside/quashecl. However, the liberty stands reservecl for the Department as has been 2 protected in the aforesaid matters which stood decided on 14.O9.2023 in W.P.Nos.259O3 of 2022 and batch 4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in these writ petitions, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SDi K. VENKAIAH . ASSISTANT REGISTRAR r,/ sEcIoN #rrcen To, 1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance (lncome Tax Dept), 15' Safdariuno Road. New Delhi - 1 10029. 2. The Chai\"rperson, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi - 1 10001 . 3. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax, lncome Tax -Department, Signature towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy. No. 37 (P) of Kothaguda, O[p. Botanical Gaidens. Se'rlingampally (M), Rangareddy, Hyderabad' Telangana - 500084. 4. The I'ncome Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1),lncome Tax Department, Signalure Towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy No. 9Z (i) pf Kothaguda' Opp. Botanicbl Gardens, Sedingampally (M), Rangareddy, Hyderabad' Telangana - 500084. 5. One CC to SRI SHREYA DEVAKI, Advocate. [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRI B.MUKHURJEE, SENIOR COUNSEL, Advocate. [OPUC] z. One CC to Ms.K.MAMATA, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP ur I I HIGH COURT DATED:2910912023 ORDER WP.No.20472 of 2022 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o '* 17 0[I 2m '.:,; 'l-.) < K i:.1 ,,.- t-' :. "