Krishna Bhima Samruddhi Local Area Bank Limited V. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department and Office of the Tax Recovery Officer, TRO, PCIT - 2, Hyderabad

WP/29629/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Krishna Bhima Samruddhi Local Area Bank Limited, which filed a writ petition against the Union of India and the Income Tax Department, challenging an order and an email issued by the Tax Recovery Officer. The petitioner sought to quash these communications as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of natural justice, and requested a stay on the proceedings. The court, after hearing the arguments, decided that the communications would be treated as provisional and directed a hearing to allow the petitioner to present their case before a final decision is made by the competent authority.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 703002 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR; B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: M V SWAROOP
• Keywords: Coercive Action; Natural Justice; Quashing; Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus; Impugned letter; Impugned email
• Section: 151 CPC

Judgement Text

"I I 134111 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT Between: Krishna Bhima Samruddhi Local Area Bank Limited, A company having its registered office at. 1-98/8 to 11lFCl501 and '1-98/8 to11lFCl502,Sth Floor Fortune Chambers, Silicon Valley, Madhapur, Hyderabad, Rangareddi Telangana 500081 Represented by its Managing Qirector, Mr. Durga Prasad DonePudi ...PETrroNER AND 1. Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi - 100 011 2. Office of the Tax Recovery Officer, TRO, PCIT - 2, Hyderabad, Signature Towers, Sy. No. 6(P), Kondapur, Sy. No. 37(P), Kothaguda, Opposite Botanical Gardens, Serilingampally Mandal, Ragareddy, Hyderabad - 500 os4 ...RESP.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ or direction or order more particularly in the nature of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records and quashing the (i) lmpugned Letter dated 14J0.2024, bearing DIN and Order No. ITBA/COM/F/1712024' 2511069630068(1) passed by Respondent No 2 and (ii) lmpugned Email dated 18.10.2024, issued by Respondent No. 2, as being illegal, arbitrary, barred in law, in excess of jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice, and, consequently, restraining the Respondents from taking any steps or coercive action against the Petitioner or otherwise proceeding against the Petitioner on the basis of the aforementioned lmpugned Letter daled 14.10.2024 and lmpugned Email dated 18.10.2024. THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 29629 OF 2024 I I lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend all further proceedings pursuant to (i) lmpugned Letter dated 14.10.2024, bearing DIN and order No: ffBNcoMtFtlTtzoz4-2st106g630068(1) passed by Respondent No. 2 and (ii) lmpugned Email dated 18.10.2024, issued by Respondent No,2, and restrain the Respondents from taking any coercive steps or otherwise proceeding against the petitioner in any manner, in the interest of justice. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition under section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant a stay of the operation of the (i) rmpugned Letter dated 14.10.2024, bearing DrN and order No: lrBA/coMtFt17t2o24-2sti069630068(1) passed by Respondent No. 2 and (ii) lmpugned Emair dated r1.1o.zo24, issued by Respondent No. 2, in the interest of .justice. counsel for the Petitioner: sRr M.v.swARoop FoR sRr MyrRI TNDUKURU Counsel for the Respondent No..l: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: M/s. B.SApNA REDDY, JUNTOR SC FOR SRI P.MURALI KRISHNA, SENIOR SC FOR ITD The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION N0.29629 of 2024 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri M.V. Swaroop, learned counsel for the petitioner appeared through video conferencing; Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, Iearned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for rt-spondent No.1 and Ms-B.Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Sri P. Murali Krishna, learned Senior Stalding Counsel for Income Tax Department, for respondent No.2. 2. With the consent finallY heard. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner received the impugned order/ notice dated 14.1O.2024 (annexure-P8). The petitioner, in turn. fi1ed reply dated 17 .1O.2024. Thereafter, by communication dated iB.1O-2024 (a exure-Pl0), the petitioner ras required to comply with the said impugned order/notice. Subsequently, the petitioner recei4ed ,t notice of hearing and said hearing is scheduled on 28.1O.2024' 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the it averments of impugned order,/notice dated 14.1O.2024 and ) 18.10.2024 may be treated to be tentative having no conclusive impact at present and the petitioner may be directed to raise all possible grounds. After hearing, the concerned authority may take a decision, in accordance 'd.ith law. 5. Ms. B.Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Sri P. Murali Krishna, learned Senior Starding Counsel for Income Tax Department, for respondent No.2, has no obiection. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing that the averments of annexure P-8 and P-10 shall be treated to be tentative/provisional subject to hearing the petitioner. After hearing the petitioner, the competent authorit5z shall take a decision in accordance with law. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stanci closecl. SD/.A.V.S. P ASSISTANT REGI SAD TRAR //TRUE COPY// To SECTION FFICER 1. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi _ 100 2. Office of the Tax Recovery,Officer, TRO, pClT _ 2, Hyderabad, Siqnature Joy,vep, Sy No 6(p), xorioapui, -Sy.'r.rIl bziijl, ri.tnaguda, oooo_sire B,;anicat Gardens, Seritingampiily'turiro\"i,'higJieddy. Hydeidbad _ 500 i, Fi: e3 3 3[l SiTll$^?'4,^ii,fli,f:Bi: Loj#3fo* cEN oF ,ND A loPUCl 5. One CC to SRt P.MURAL| KRISHNA, SENIOR SC FOR tTD [OpUCl *6 Two CD Copies qF I I I I I I 'I L i & I HIGH COURT DATED:2411012024 ORDER WP.No.29629 of 2024 on ( tA 2 6 [tr 20zt 1HE s14 ! r,4I r., Jq DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. I I ( ,) -) +- {,J\"t Z16'P;-Y]-' "