Mr.Nerusu Venkateswara Rao V. Union of India

WP/906/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Nerusu Venkateswara Rao, the petitioner, challenging the legality of the income tax orders and notices issued for the assessment year 2015-16 by various respondents including the Union of India and the Income Tax Department. The petitioner argued that the orders were passed under the un-amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which did not comply with the requirements for faceless assessments and proper notice as mandated by the amended provisions effective from April 1, 2021. The court referenced a previous judgment in a similar batch of writ petitions (WP No.25903 of 2022 & batch) where it was held that such proceedings under the un-amended provisions were not sustainable.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 724235 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal case
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR; B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: P SOMASHEKAR REDDY
• Keywords: Arbitrary; Faceless assessment; Illegal; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Void ab initio; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 148A(d); 265; 226; 144(8)

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO:906 OF 2024 Between: lVlr.Nerusu Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Nerusu Madhava Rao aged about 66 years, Fl/o. 8-3-237141N2 Laxminarsimha Nagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad - 500046. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Rep. by its Secretary, 166-8 North Block, New Delhi - 110 001 2. lncome Tax Officer, Ward 14(1), Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 3. The Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax-l, lncome Tax Towers, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana-500004. 4. The National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of lndia, New Delhi. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of Ihr' Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated.in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to: (i) lssue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly, one, in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order passed by the Respondent No.2 in passing the Order dateci 2110412022 uls. 148A(d) and Notice issued by the Respofldent M.2under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 daled 2'l tO4t2O22 as illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, void ab initio, and being viohtive of the provisions of lncome Tax Act, 1961 and Articles 14,19 and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently; (ii) Set aside the Order dated 2110412022 uls. 14BA(d) and Notice issued by the Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 clated 2110412022 calling for the return of income of the petitioner for AY. 2015-16 and the Assessment Order dated 0111212023 and any conse(luent proceedings as lacking in jurisdiction. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.SOMA SHEKAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY, SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJI WRIT PETITI ON No.9O6 OF 2o24 ORDER:(per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. P.Soma Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.l and I 4s. B. Sapna Reddy, learned junior Standing Counsel-.for Income Tax appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the entire record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been frled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 {for short, \"the Act\") bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST /S / t48-t /2022-23 / tO428O8187 (1), dated 21.O4.2022 passed by respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2015-16 and the consequent notice under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144-8 of the Act, dated O1.12.2023, bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST lS/147 /2023- 24lrosa46tgse (1). 2 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisionti of the Act which carne into effect from Ol.O4.202',1, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 1'18 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 1'18A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner' 4. Wht:reas, Iearned counsel for the petitioner contenderl that, in the instant case, reopening has been initiated 1>y the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer' In support of his contention, he relied upon the recent judgment rendered by this very Bench in WP'No'25903 of 2022 &' batch, dated 14.Og.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of .urit petitions to the Iimited extent' 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Department does not dispute that the said objection was decided in the aforesajd batch of Writ Petitions However, he further contended that apart from the afor,:said objection, there have bee.n other various -7 3 , I objections also which the petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 6. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, while disposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: , p7. fhe preliminary objection raised bg tle petitioner rS sustained and all these u.trit petitions stands olloued on this uery juisdictional issue. Since tlrc impugned notices ond orders are getting qnshed on ttrc point of jurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proeed furtler and decid.e tLLe other issues raised bg the petitioner which stands reserued to be raised and contended in an app rop iate p roceeding s. \" '38. Since tLrc Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agarual, supra, os a one-time measure exercising tLrc pouers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted tlrc Reuenue to proeed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court ollouing the petitions onlg on the procedural Jlout, the right confered on the Reuenue uoild remain reserued to proceed furtLer if theg so want from tlrc stage of the order of tle Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aga rutal, supra.\" 7. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection of the I petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in I i I i I 4 accordance with the amended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters the rights of the parties would stand' reserved as is envisagr:d at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. Conseqtrently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. L. SIVA PARVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTI N OFFICER To, 8. Two CD C:pies BSR GJP 1. The Secr,>tary Ministry of Finance, 166-8 North Block, New Delhi, Union of lndia - 11t) 001 2. The lncorne Tax Officer, W ard 14(1), Hyderabad, IT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad a J!9, e,ri,ngiOal. Commissioner Of lncome Tax-|, lncome Tax Towers, Masab ranK, HyoeraDad, telangana- 500 004. 4. The Natioral Faceress As:essment centre, rncome Tax Department Ministry 5. One CC tc SRI P.SOMA SHEKAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI 6. One CC tc M/s. B.SAPNA REDDY, SC FOR TNCOME TAX [OPUC] 7. One CC kr SRI cADt PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICTTOR GEN. OF tNDtA. High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyde'rabad tOpUbl a I HIGH COI.'RT DATED: 1110112024 ORDER g 27 tEii zrli wP.No.gori of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS '-l----,-r't' cr{it> G*u I I r-: 1' :-il i .il "