Vyjayanthi Educational Society V. Union of India

WP/34439/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed challenging the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner argued that the notice was issued without jurisdiction and was arbitrary, referencing a previous judgment by the same court in W.P.No.15393 of 2023, which set a precedent. The respondents included various officials from the Income Tax Department. The court, referencing a similar case (W.P.No.30153 of 2023), decided to allow the writ petition, setting aside the impugned notice and staying all related proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 724507 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.30153 of 2023, W.P.No.25903 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GADI KUMAR; SUNDAR PRASUPAT
• Assessee Lawyers: T PRADYOTH
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Mandamus; Writ petition
• Section: 148; 142(1); 148A; 226

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE AT H YD ESJfJE DO F TE LAN GANA (Speciat Originat .turii-oiction; FRIDAY,.THE TWENW SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND rWCruriTN-NT*'''\"' PRESENT THE HoNoURABLE I rHE HoNouRABLE sRr,:li',{:l::ffi;;1;^.^ [ 33e7 ] WRIT PE NO:3 TITION 4439 0F 2023 Between: AND 1. 2. 3. IA NOilOF 2023 M!f,laHx,E:lT:'Bl?,:::':U6 2-2-121tA Near ord Bus Stand, Kidnaipet, ...PETITIONER Uil?Xry%r Hfl1i;\"5\"fiiiiiled bv its Secrerary, Department or Revenue, i.}8\",fi::\"\"t commissioner of lncome Tax officer, Aayakar Bhavan, The Assistant Commissioner of tncn-^ T--,. &:^_ Aayakar Bhavan, t-tyaerao, j'l of lncome Tax officer, Exemption circle -l (1), ...RESPONDENTS petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction more particurarry one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice u/s 14g of the Act having DIN and Notice No' ,'BA/ASTrs/148 112022-2311050617033(1) issued by the 2nd Respondent dar'ed 10t03t2023 for the Assessment year 2019-20, as being unrau*ur' arbitrary ' and having been issued without jurisdiction as against the raw raid down by this Hon'bre court in writ petition No. 153g3 0f 2o23and batch dated 14109/2023 and set-aside the same Petition under Section r 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to further stay all the proceedings in pursuance of the rmpugned notice u/s 14g of the Act having DrN and Notice No. ,rBA/AST /sr148-1t2022- 2311050617033(1) issued by the 2nd Respondent dated .10/03/2023 for the Assessment year 2019_ 20' incruding the proceedings pursuant to notice uts 142(1)of .the Act having DIN and Notice No' .rBA/AST/F1142(1)12023-24/105820223/(1) dated 24t11/2023 and Letter dared o7r12t2023 bearing DrN and Letter No.. rrBA/ASrFh7t2o23- 2411058562799(1) issued by the 2nd Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: SRI T. PRADYOTH Counsel for the Respondents: SRI GAD| PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent N9:._?q1, SRt SUNDART R ptSUpATt ( s E N to R s c FoR I r,rccjrvr e -rixb-E PARTM E Nr) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.34439 0F 2023 ORDER (per Hon'ble Si .Iustice p.SAM KOSHfl) When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it has been informed by the parties that an identical Writ petition i.e., W.P.No.30153 of 2023 has alreadl, been allowed and disposed of uide order, dated 30. lO.2023 2. In view of the lacr that the identical matter has already been allowed by this Court, u,e are inclined to allow this Writ petition in terms of the order passed in w.p.No.30153 of 2023 decided on 30.10.2023 on similar terms. 2 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs SD/- K. NKAIAH //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT R GISTRAR SECTION FFICER To, B l The secretary, Union of rndia, Departmenr of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 2. The Assistant Commissioner Of lncome Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhavan, Hyderabad 3 The Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax officer, Exemption circre .r(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Hyderabad. 1. 9ne CC to SRt T PRADYOTH, Advocale tOpUCl 5. ONE CC tO SRI. GADI PRAVEE^I XUIT,'NN dI'' SbIICITOR GEN. OF INDIA , [oPUC] 6. One CC to SRt. SUNDART R ptSUpATt, SENTOR STANDTNG COUNSEL FOR TNCOME rAX DEpARTMENTtopuCf \"- ' 7. Two CD Copies (flgp^ witl-a gopv of the order, dared 30.10.2023 passed bv this court in w.p.No. 30153 of 2023 to this order) M GJ$ k HIGH COURT DATED:221121202i ORDER WP.No.34439 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1H€ SIA 14: ( o 12 JAI'I 2024 * ,S P/rTcPrro (( (' -1' . > o * a A$\" 3 q THE HOI{'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE I,AXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY UI.P. No. 3O153 of 2()23 ORDER: per Hor L'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOs.Hyl Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record- 2. The instant petition has been frled challenging the Assessment Order passed by respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) ofthe Income Tax Act, i961 (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\") dated 25.04-2022 for the Assessment Year 2Ol8-19. 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present rvrit petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which came into effect from O1.O4.2O21, the respondents while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act were required to issue notice under Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drau.n are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, it has been contended by the petitioner that in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Juridictional Assessing Oflicer. In respect ofthe said objection that the petitioner had raised, he relied upon the recent batch o[ writ 2 petitions decided by w.p.No.2s9o3 of 2022., tn'\" very Bench on nd batch to the limited \"*r\"n'.r.o'on ,o\" vide 4. Leamed counsel *:::*__:\":\"r.:\":ffi:\"w.urd n., dispu,e .f objection, there have 0\".=' \"'o-\"\" that apart \"'o otttn matters' p\"litio., \". has rai sed,,,n\"\";;n;;:\"\" \" \" ;\"; \":, ::'jH: S. So far as this cr Department is \"orr\"\"rr'ttttoon of the rearned w.p.No.259o3 ot zozz u) this Bench' while paragraph Nos.37 & au * o batch had taken note ich is reproduced herein un counsel for the disposing oI of the same in der: \"37. The prelim. ffiH#ffit\"#fiffi#ffi 39. Since the Hon **$*rt's*$ffi 6. In rriew of the sam petition arso on sim,ar te we are inclined to allow the present wrir stands alloweal on the obj Accordingly, the prr have not been dra*. ,, a\"\"t'ot of the petition.. ,n\" \"\"nt writ Petition under rhe unamended rj:\"',::1;;: m\"\":\"ff \" Ji. not sustainablc. 3 As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch right of the matters, the envrsaged in respondents would stand reserved as is paragraph Nos.37 & 3g of the said batch. 7. Consequently, stald closed. No order as to costs- mrscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shall P.SAM KOSHY, J Dated:30.1O.2023 aqs LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY ,J "