Mr. Narahari Angarekula V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nizamabad and The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 2, Hyderabad and Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National e-Assessment Centre

WP/33436/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Narahari Angarekula, the petitioner, challenging the assessment order and notice issued by the Income Tax authorities for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the orders were arbitrary, illegal, and violated principles of natural justice as well as specific articles of the Constitution and sections of the Income Tax Act. The High Court found that the procedures followed by the Income Tax Department did not comply with the amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, which came into effect on April 1, 2021, requiring a faceless manner of proceeding under Section 148A. The court's decision was influenced by a precedent set in a similar case decided earlier in 2023.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 805275 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2023
• 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: SUNDARI R PISUPATI
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Legal Violation; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 148A(d); 148A; 265; 226; 19(1)(g); 14BA(d)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITI ON NO: 33436 OF 2023 District, Telangana lVIr. Narahari Angarekula, S/o Ntlr. A-Sayanna, aged 69 ysjlrl,^Occ-,PY:h?= H- ttto.- 4-70l8li, Venkateshwar Colony, Armoor - 503 224' Nizamabad [ 337e ] ...PETITIONER Between: AND 1 2 J The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1, Nizamabad, lncome fai Office, 6-2-15613, Subash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503 002, Telangana' The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax - 2, Hyderabad, l T Towers, 10-2- 3, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004' Telangana. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Centre' r.fe* b\"ir'i, nooni ruo.- 4O1,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or Direction, declaring a. the order passed by the 1st Respondent, u/s 14BA(d) of the lncome Tax Act, '1961, dated 21 .O4.2O22, bearing DIN and Notice No - ITBAJAST/F/148At2O22-23t1O428O4110(1), for the Assessment Year 2018 - 19 andb.thenoticeissuedbythelStRespondent,u/sl4SofthelncomeTaxAct, .t961, dated 21.O4.2022, bearing DIN and Notice No.- ITBA/AST/S/148112022- 23t10428042g5(1), for the Assessment Year 2018 . 19 arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles r 4, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 , and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice. 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 may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the notice issued u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 21 .04.2022, bearing DIN and Notice No.: |TBA/AST tst148-1t2O22-2311042804235(',l ), for the Assessment Year 20',l8 - 19, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition; Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.V.A' SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel forthe Respondents: Ms. SUNDARI R. PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax DePt) The Court made the following: ORDER To, THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI U/RIT PETITION No.33436 of2023 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHtf) Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it has been informed by the parties that an identical writ petition i'e', W.P.No.3O153 of 2023 has already been allowed and disposed of uide order dated 30 .lO .2023 - 2. In view of the fact that the identical matter has already been allowed by this Court, this Writ Petition also stands allowed in terms of the order passed in W'P'No'3O153 of 2023 decided on 30. 10.2O23. {s a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this writ petition, sha,ll stand closed. No order as to costs' SD/. K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT GI //TRUE COPY// SECTIO OFFICER Two CD Copies 1. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1, Nizamatad' lncome ' i; iji'i;;, 6-2-iso/a, suuasrr Nagar, Nizamabad - 503 002, Telangana'. ^ ^ 2 i[; F;i;;;it -commissioneiot tn\"]o,\" rax - 2. Hvderabad, l T'Towers' 10-2- 3. AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004' Telangana' 3 X'.;'.#;;iil\"it1 r\"\"\".\" rax Department, ational e-Assessment Centre' \" itffiilii,i; nooni rlo.- qol'ind iloor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium' New Delhi - 110 003. 4. O;; cCio Snr n\"v-q. SIVA KARTIKEYA, Advocate IoPUCI 5. One CC to Ms. suNDAiiii'pisupAiiidi stioiinior\" rix Dept) [oPUC] (Along with the order copy dated 30j02023 in W'P' No'30153 of 2O231 b. BN GJ F I l HIGH COURT DATED:1111212023 ORDER WP.No.33436 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS .T $E ST4r4' J c o 2 I JAN 2024 = a * * O6*sPAic. Ft') rQ( TrIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No.3O153 of 2023 ORDER: (per Hctn'ltle S,i .,ILsrice P.Sl{]t' KOSIIy, Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the pctitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel fo,- Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire re :ord. 2. The instant petition has been hled challenging the Assessment O der passed by respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) of the Income Tr x Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\") dated 25.04.2022 fo,' the Assessment Year 2Ol8-79. 3- One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the pr 3sent writ petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act w rich came into effect frorn 01 .O4 .2021 , the respondents while pr,rceeding under Section 148 of the Act were required to issue notice ur der Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the as sessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be dt awn are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, it has been contended bl the petitioner that in the instant case, reopening has been initiated b1 the Juridictional Assessing Officer. In respect of the said objection that the petitioner had raised, he relied upon the recent batch of writ 2 petitions decided by this very Bench on 14 'O9 '2023 virle W.P.No.25903 of 2022 and batch to the limited extent. 4. Learned counsel for the Department would not dispute of having decid.ed the said objection in the aforesaid batch matte: s However, learned counsel submits that objection, there have been other various petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 5. So far as this contention of the Department 1S apart from the aforese id otrjections also which t:re learned counsel for t.le concerned, thls Bench, while disposing of W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch had taken note of the same in paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which is reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained and all these writ petiLions stands allowed on this very jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of .lurisdiction, we are not rnclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to be raised and contended in an appropriate proceedings.\" 38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted the Revenue to proceed under the substituted provisions, and this Court allowing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the right conferred on the Revenue would remain reserved to proceed further if they so want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Cotrrt in the case ofAshish Agarwal, supra. 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to a11ow the present w it petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petiti'rn stands allowed on the objection of the petitioner that the proceedin'3s have not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision b rt under the unamended proviston u'hich is otherwise not sustainabre' 3 A: has been heid by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters' the ri1 ht of the respondents would stand reselved as is envisaged in pi ragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said batch No order as to costs' 7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall st md closed P.SAM KOSITY, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHET'TY, J D Lted: 30.10.2023 a{s 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No.3O153 of 2023 lper the llon'ble- Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Dated: 30.10.2023 aqs "