Mr. Sudarshan Reddy Kottur V. The Income Tax Officer

WP/8002/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Mr. Sudarshan Reddy Kottur challenging an order from the Income Tax Department which required him to pay 20% of a disputed tax demand for the assessment year 2017-18, pending the appeal's disposal. The petitioner argued that this order was arbitrary and violated principles of natural justice, especially since a similar previous order had been set aside by the court. The respondents acknowledged the issue and indicated that the order had been withdrawn and a new hearing would be conducted.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 691817 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2017-18; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Stay of demand; Writ petition
• Section: 151 CPC

Judgement Text

"[ 3311 I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO:8002OF 2O23 Between: AND 1. 2. Mr. Sudarshan Reddv Kottur, S1o Mr K.Hanmath Reddy, aged 44 yea$, _o99.^B.u1ngss, D. No'. 44,t,2b, cu;rairrtcait, einl sii\"\"f koti nvoerjoJ-l 500 001, Telangana. ...PETITIONER IJ1.^191.-Tnxptriger,,wg( 5(1), Hyderabad, tr rowers. AC Guards, Masab tank, Hyderabad - 500 084, Telanoana. ,Ihe Addjlional / Joint/ Deputy /Assistant eommissioner of lncome Tax / rn-come I ax Officer, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No.. 401 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal ruenru SiiOlum, itiw Dethi _ i 10 003. Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia ,rrriffT:i',fT;: circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction, one, more particurarry in the nature of Mandamus decraring the'order of the 1st Respondent, dated 10.03.2023, vide DlN. lrBA/coMlFr17t2o22-23l1osos96328(1), direcring the perrtioner to pay 20o/o of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appear of the petitioner before the 1st Appellate Authority, for the Assessment year 2O1Z - 18, as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, bereft of any reasons, violative of principles of natural iustice and to consequenfly set_aside the same and grant stay of recovery, pending disposar of the petitioner's appear before the 1st Appelate Authority, in the interests of justice .A 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 grant stay of all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order of the 1st Respondent, dated 10.03.2023, vide DlN. ITBA/COM/F/1712022' 23l1050596328(1), in directing the Petitioner to pay 20% o'f the disputed demand, for the Assessment Year 2017 - 18, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for Respondents: Ms. B. SAPNA REDDY, COUNSEL FOR SRI J. V. PRASAD (Sr. SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER / THE HON'BLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE UJJAL BHTIYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE N.TUKARAMTI W.,P.No.8002 of 2023 ORDER, 1l,er tb Hoiblc rbc CbicJJutit ujlal Bbrlan) Fleard Mr. AV.ASiva Kanikep, leamed counsel for rhe petitioner and I[s. B.Sapna Reddy, leamed counsel represenring lvlr. J.V.Prasad, leamed Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Depanment for the respondenr. 2. Challenge made in this wrir petirion is to the order dated 10.03.2023 issued by respondenr No.1 fbr rhe assessmenr year 2017-18 disposing of the application for stay of demand filed by the petitioner by granting stay subiect to paymenr of 20\"/o of the demand. l. lrarned counsel for the petitioner submits rhat when the petitioner had approached this Coun earlier againsr a similar order dated 16.0I.2023, this C_oun had set aside the said order uide the order dated 30.01.2023 in X/.p.No.lg14 of 2023 and remanded the mamer back to respondent No.1 ior 2 passing a fresh order in accordance with law after giving due opponunitl.of hearing ro the petitioner. Irutead of Passmg an order in tenru o[ rhc direction of this Court, respondent No.1 had issued anorher order dated 10.03.2023 vinually similar to the one u4rich uas set aside by this Caun ujtle the order dated -.)0.01.202J in fl.p.No.1g1 4 of 2023. 4. Learncd counsel lbr the respondents submits that a letter has already been issued by respondent No.l for withdrawal o[ the order dated 10.03.2023 and thereafter to hear thc peririoneron 10.04.202j forpassing a fresh order. 5. Recording rhc abor.e submission made by leamed counsel lor the rcspondenrs, rhis writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 6. Ncedless Lo say, till rhe fresh order is passed by respondent No.1, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petltloner. 3 As a sequel, miscellaneou petitions, pending if any, stand closed. 1 SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD To, //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGIST SECTION OFFICER 1 2 3 4 5 M8C GJP i!?ilr*?l,i;.?rigays63 3$l: iJfl?'#,ij, ,r rowers, AC Guards, r ne Addrttonat / Joint / DeDuty /Assistant Lommissioner of lncome Tax / tncome Tax officer. Natioiat 'e+sseii.iiertte;E\"N;* Dethi, Room No A?l Bt ,S'B:lh.r1$,i;r,?*rt*;,dffi's-tiliil,'iriw oerni i iij d03 r,l3ffi 8;ti'yf, ::?3I'54F6fl ,,ffi s^[?,r.KlAdvocateropucr HIGH COURT DATED: 24t03tZOZg '- .':. .$ s* b t _ ORDER WP.No.8O02 ot 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS @q^* g t^l "