Mr. Shaik Ahmed Ali V. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance and The Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad

WP/3762/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Shaik Ahmed Ali, the petitioner, challenging an order issued by the Income Tax Officer under sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner argued that the order was arbitrary, illegal, and void ab initio, as it did not comply with the amended provisions of the Act that came into effect on April 1, 2021. These amendments require that any reassessment proceedings be conducted in a faceless manner and that the assessee be given an opportunity to be heard following a notice under section 148A. The court referenced a previous judgment in a similar case (WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch) where it was held that such procedural requirements are mandatory. The court's decision to allow the writ petition was based on the failure to adhere to these mandatory procedural requirements.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799462 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal vs. Revenue
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, Section 151A of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Procedural Flaw; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 149; 144B; 148A; 151A; 226

Judgement Text

"[337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO:3762 OF 2024 Between l AND 1 Mr Shaik Ahmed Ali, S/o. Mr. Mohd Ghouse, aged about 68 years, B_16_30/3, Road No.7, lVlythri N.agar, Sowbhagya fvagai Coiony, CnintarikJnia -i.el Nagar, Hyderabad - 500074. ...PETITIONER Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax P\"pgd.glt .Yinistry of Finance, Room N_o. 4O1 ,2\"d ftoor, flijmp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi -1.10 003. The lncgme Tax Officer, Ward 9(.1), Hyderabad, l.T. Towers, A.C. Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS 2 Petition under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass an order or direction, especialry one in the nature of wRlr oF MANDAMUS holding that the order passed by .1\"1 Respondent u/s. 147 r.w.s. 1448 of the Act, dt.01 .02.2024 with DtN No.|rBA/AST/S t147t2o2s- 2411060404770( 1 ) for the Ay.2O15-16, as arbitrary, iilegal, bad in taw, void ab initio, apart from being violative of provisions of section 1 4gA and section .149 of the Act and also contrary to the circular issued by GBDT and provisions of section 151A of the Act, and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under sectron i 5'r 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, incruding any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the '1't Respondent u/s. 147 r.w.s. 1448 of the Act, dt.o1 .o2.2o24with DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/1 47 12O23-24t 1 060404Tt O(1 ) for the Ay.201 5_1 6. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A V RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJT WRIT PETITION No.3762 OF 2024 ORDER:lper Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHtt) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: \"to pass an ord.er or direction especiallg one tn the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS holding that the order possed by 1st Respondent u/s 147 r u s 1448 of the Act dt 01 02 2024 Luith DIN No ITBA/AST/S/ 147/202324/ 1O604047701 for the Ay 2015 16 as arbitrary illegal bod in lanu uoid ab initto opart from being uiolatiue of prouisions of section 148A and section 149 of the Act and also contrary to the circular issued bg CBDT and prouisions of section 151A of the Act and consequentlA set aside the same\". 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the arnended provisions of the Act which came into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148A and provide an opportunit5r of hearing to the 2 PSK,J & MTR,J W.P.No.3762 oJ 2024 assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. 3. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Jurisdictioual Assessing Officer. In support of his contention, he relied upon the recent judgment rendered by this very Bench in WP.No.259O3 of 2022 &' batch, dated 14.O9.2023 rvherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 4. On the other hand, leamed Standing Counsel for the respondent-Department does not dispute that the said objection was decided in the aforesaid batch of Writ Petitions. However, he further contended that apart from the aforesaid objection, there have been other various objections also which the petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 5. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concemed, this Bench, while disposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taker-r note of t 3 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.3762 oJ 2024 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustained and all these utrit petitions stands allowed on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues roised bg ttte petitioner which stands reserued to be raised and contended in an approp riate proceeding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the cose of Ashish AgaruLa| supra, as a one-time measure exercising the pouters under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted tle Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allotuing the petitions onlg on the procedural flaut, the ight confered on the Reuenue would remain reserued to proceed further if theg so u.tant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarutal, supra.\" 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to a-llow the present writ petition also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection of the petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in accordance with the amended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. 7 . As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stald reserved as is I I 4 @ . ( PSI(,J & MTE,J W.P.No.3762 oJ 2O24 envisaged at paragraph Nos'37 & 38 of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions' No order as to costs' Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed' -_ SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY GISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT RE SECTI* OFFICER To, TJ GJP 1. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax ' ij;;;,fi\";i, r,rrini.t.v of Finance, Room No 4o1 ,znd Floor, E-Ramp' Jawaharlal Nehru Siadium, Delhi -1 10 003' z. ln\"ln.or\" iax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad, l T Towers, A C Guards' Masab Tank, HYderabad a. in\" rn\"om\" fai Otticer, Ward - 9(1), l.T. Towers, A C Guards, Masabtank' Hvderabad - 500001 . a. Ohe CC to Sri A. V Raghu Ram Advocate to?gql -. 5. O;; Cc to sri J V Prasa,-d (SC for lncome Tax) [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies 6 HIGH COURT DATED:1410212024 ORDER WP.No.3762 ot 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. fl1 o 14, I4 ilE S k o^. .). c J U o 2 B nAB 2024 C, -l * O5, DATC IEC @ c\"li 6N LI ^K "