Manoj Kumar Bang V. Union of India

WP/15369/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Manoj Kumar Bang, the petitioner, challenging the dismissal of his income tax appeal by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, due to non-prosecution. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal on 26.05.2017, and subsequent applications for restoration were also dismissed. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal's actions were arbitrary and without legal authority, as they did not follow the proper procedures outlined in Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, which mandates that an appeal should not be dismissed for non-prosecution without a hearing on merits. The High Court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, noting the lack of proper notification and the petitioner's unawareness of the proceedings due to his counsel's withdrawal of representation without informing him.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 677100 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: NAMAVARAPU RAO; B SARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: P
• Keywords: Income tax assessment; Non-prosecution; Restoration of appeal; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 254

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 15369 OF 2021 Manoj Kumar Bang, S/o. Bankatlal Bang, Aged 57 years, Occ: Business Residing al6-3-1237, Flat No. 105, F Block, Sethi Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500082. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Union of lndia, Represented by its Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Office of IVinistry of Finance, Room No. 46, North Block, New Delhi - 1 10001 2 lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad A-Bench, Room No. 502 and 505, CGO Towers, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080. 3 Asstt. Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle 4('l ), Hyderabad, 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad- 500004 4. Joint Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle 4(1), Hyderabad, 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad- 500004. 5 Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Central Circle 4('l ), Hyderabad, 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad- 500004 6 Commissioner (Appeals), Central Circle 4(1 ), Hyderabad, 7th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad- 500004 ,,.RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying lhat in the circumstances stated in the affldavit filed therewith, the High Court may be Dleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly, in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for records and quashing the order dated 23.03 2021 in lV.A. No.26lHydl2020 (Arising out of ITA No.542lHydl2016) issued by Respondent No.2 for being arbitrary, illegal, unjust and without the authority of law and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 to restore ITA No.542lHydl2O16 and hear it on merits in accordance with law. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps for income tax assessment relating to Assessmenl Year 2008-2009. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. HARSHA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AVINASH DESAI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 6: SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA, The Court made the following: ORDER Betwee n: HO O t_ lt, lt l_ [ sRt,I t,s-il cE ]t.s. IIA 1, ct I, .N t)RA I{AO , I) lto ot r{ l}1.t.. st,U .tt s I'tc]_'[. I ot) h.t 1., R rit I'etition o.15-169 ol 202l ()ltl)l.l{ : r'., , I hi' r'it l'critiorr i: lllctl assailinll the olde r clL.l:.03.102 I passcri l11 i ,l., .No.2(rrt'lYD/2020 arising out ol l.l'.A.No.542lllYD/2016, passecl br' the lr.rcome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad 'A' Bench, Flyderabatl. 2, 'l-he petitioner herein is an assessee under the provisions of the Incor.nc 'l'ax Act, I 96 1 (for short, 'the Act'). 3, 'l'lre C-ornrrissionel ol lncomc 'l'ax (Appeals) - I, I-lyderabad hacl passcrl irn olclcr rlt. I I .0 Li0l6 lbr the Assessr.ncrrt Year 1008-09 1. I lris rr irs chailcn.qe tl trv petirioner irr l.'l'.A.No.541/IIYD/2016 belbrc thc l'' r'cspLr rrclcr.r t bt' cngaqin-q u Counsc.l. 5. ,. ceolclirrg to cppellant, the Counsel engaged bv petitioner filed a Memo bclirle the hearing of'the rratter on 13.02.20 l7 betbre the 2''d respondcnt secliing pc.rmission to rn,ithdra',v his Pou,er ol'Attorney, and requesting tvticc bc senr to petitioncr. 6. Anvway, he did not appear before the 2nd respondent and so on 26.05.1011 , the Tribr-rnal dismissed the matter on the ground of non- plosccLrtion |clYins on certain decisions rct'errccl to thc|ein | l::169_1021 7. It observed in the order that pctitioner is at libcrll to scck recall ol thc order bv rva)' ol filing an I!1.A. shonin-g sirlllcicnt causc *hich plcr.cntcd lrinr liorr apyrr'rring olr thc clutc ol'ht'aling. ol'tltr.. . pcul or.r 16.05.1017 tl. i ccording to petitioner. it had rro knou. lcdgc alrout rlr,-- ,.lisposal o1' this Appeal and came to know abour it only ir-r the year 20I 9 9. Thereafter, the petitioner filed M.A.No.26lHYDl202O befbre the 2\"d respondent - Tribunal invoking Sub-section (2) of Section 254 and seeking restoration of the Appeal which had been disn.rissed for non- prosecution. 10. By the said Order dt.23.0l.l0l I . rhc 2'\"1 rcsl.ronclcnr I ribunal ciisrnissed ilI. A.No.l6lliYl)/1010 i s tlot tn(tittt(tin(thl(,oti tlrc ulirLrntl tlrnt thc appeal is lilecl bcyond thc prcscribcd tintc Iirnit ot'six nrorrrlrs rrrrdcr Scctiorr 2-5-112) ot thc. Act, I l. Challenging the sante, the prescnr Writ Pctition is tllcd 12. Heard Sri I). Ilarsha. leanted Scrrior- Counscl ap1)carir.rq on bchalf of Sri Avinash Desai, counsel fbr petitioner. and Sr.i Il. Narasirrha Sarma, counsel for respondents. 13. The counsel for petitioner contended that under Rule 24 of the Rules framed under the above Act, the Tribunal, even ila party does not appear on a date to which a hearing ol the Appeal is ad.journe.d. cannot ., N,1Stt.J & 1Vl .J p,15369 2021 cataot (lis,liss the . ppeal lbr,.rr_prosc.ctrti.'. anrl ir r'as rlutv-bo.nd to pass ln olrle r in titc, ppcrrl on ntcr.its l{. Irr the light ol'this provision of Law, it is shocking rhar 2,,J respondenr - l-r'ib,nar passed the order on 26.05.2017 dismissing the Appeal on the ground of non-prosecntion which it was not entitled to do in view of Rule 24 of the Rules f'ramed under the above Act. 15. No doubt, the application for recall should have been filed within six months under Sub-Section (2) of Section 254 and there has been some delay in filing the said application. 16. Ha'in-q rega'd ro the fhct that the Counser tbr the petitioner had rvithclrar'r', his Power of' Attorney, rvhich had been issued to him by petitio,c. * itlroLrt inlbrrning peritioner, the Tribunai ought to ha,e issuecl .rrtie e ro petitio,er bc'fbre it passecr the orcrer .r.r 16.05.2017. as IC(ltrcstL'(l lrr tltc ('ounscl. 'l hc tlcla.l in ntrtr.ins N1.A. o.l6iIlyl),,1020 on [lrc purt .i pctitiorrcl is ob'iousl,r' on accoul'lt of lack ol'knou,ledge or' rvhat transpirecl when the Appeal was heard and order was passed on 26.05.2017. It is not denied that even the order dt.26.05.2017 was not served on petitioner though copy is marked to him. 17. In this view o1'rhe matter. $,e ser aside the order dt.26.05.2017 dismissing t.-i'.A.No.542ll-lYD/20 l6 and also rhe order t1t.23.03.2021 passcd I lt lV1.A.No.26lllYDl2020 arisine our o1' 1.1.,, .No.-j-ll,llYI)rl0t6: M.A.No.l6lllyDl2020 is allorved ancl p_r5369_2021 I.T.A.No.542IHYD/2016 is restored to the llle ol 2n'j resgrondcnt - l'rihLrnai 18. l-he lr)'r rcspondcnr -l'ribunal is dircctcci to issrrc n()ricr- to and proceecl to hear the Appeal ancl disposc it olJ'as e.xpcclitiouslv as possible prelerably u,ithin six (06) rnonths. pctitioncr at [hc acldrcss irrdicatcd in rhc causc-tirlc ro this r'ir l,crition 19. Accordinglv. the Writ I)etition is disposed ol' u ith rhc above dircctions. No ordcr as to costs. 20. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending il an1, in rhis Writ Petition, shall stand closed. o T ,TRUE COPY// SD/-T.TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR t j L-, SECTION OFFICER 1' The Revenue Secretary, tvrinistry of Finance, Dpl.artment of Revenue, office oi f ASA? of Finance, union or rnjra]'i\"\"i. \"r.ri.?o, North Btock New o.errri _ 2. The rncome Tax Anpelate Tribunar. Hyderabad A_Bench, Room No. 502 and sos cco rowers'xavaors_uoal Sl;;#;;ffi _ s00080 3. The Asstr. Comrnrssroner o\"f t.;\";; i;;\"b\".ilat Circle 4(1). Hyderabad, 7tn , fi\"^\",;;|1r:kar Bhavan Basneli elsh; Hvo\"eralao_ sooooa - ii;.\";ir;;I1,;;f \"\"r or lncome rax. centrar .1,.|\"^ iii, Hyderabad 7rh s l_e -Lo i ii tffi ,\" ffi*.?i rl!]1j,c:;ilxf 3ifl?,0 5 00004 ^ Aayakar ahrr;\", d;rh\"er Bagh. Hyderaoa(_ 5-03#;,. Hvderabad. 7rh Froor. 6 rhe Commissioner iAppeat.l,t\";ii;ibi;;\";ii , Rl:r:i .\";rj;\"iiB;sh Hyderabad- 500004 )' Hvderabad, 7th Froor Aayakar ., i, ff g,t $\"*' u:[,:*l'f,ft{#iiil#{,1!! ilou,, \", .,. r G e n e ra r o p u c ] f ( HIGH COURT DATED:08 10712021 ORDER W.P.No.15369 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0 2 !uB20t1 15, c 1 t t $E S'A 1,() ? * Xslgz / "