Mr. Tulluri Brahmaiah V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Income Tax Office, Kothagudem and The Pr- Chief Commissioner, Income Tax Department and Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to the Government Ministry of Finance

WP/5349/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Tulluri Brahmaiah, the petitioner, challenging the orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Department, which he claimed were without jurisdiction and violated his rights under the Constitution. The petitioner argued that the reopening of his assessment was not conducted in accordance with the amended provisions of the law, specifically Section 148A, which requires notices to be issued and hearings to be conducted in a faceless manner. The respondents, including the Income Tax Officer and the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, defended the validity of their actions under the unamended provisions. The court's decision referenced a similar batch of writ petitions it had previously disposed of, which supported the petitioner's stance on the procedural requirements that were not followed in his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 672686 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WP.No.25903 of 2022 e, batch, dated 14.09.2023
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Article 14 of the Constitution of India, Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, Section 148 of the Act, Section 148A of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD; GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KARAN TALWAR
• Keywords: Faceless Proceedings; Jurisdiction; Natural Justice; Reopening of assessment; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 14; 148A; 226; 19(1)(g)

Judgement Text

"t 337s I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRl JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 5349 OF 2024 Between: Mr- Tulluri Brahmaiah, S/o Pullaiah, Age 58 years, Occ; D.No.2-103, Main Road, Aswapuram, Hwp Aswapur Colony, 507116. Agriculture, Residing at Khammam, Telangana- .....PETITIONER AND 1 . The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-1 , lncome Tax Office, Kothagudem 5071 17 Bhadradri Kothagudem District Telangana. 2. The Pr- Chief Commissioner, lncome Tax Department, 1Oth Floor, lncome Tax Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004. 3. Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitdtion of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other applicable writ declaring and setting aside the impugned order dated 28.03.2023 with DIN and Notice No.|TBA/AST/FI 1 48N2O22-2311051 455902(1 ) issued by Respondent No1, the lmpugned Notice dated 03.03.2023 with DIN and Notice No.lTBA/AST/Fi148A(SCNy2022-231l05039755611) and proceedings in furtherance to it as being without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice, patently illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1 Xg) of the Constitution of lndia. |.A.NO:1 OF m24 Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order dated 28-03'2023 with DIN and Notice No.rrBtuAST/Ft14}N2o22-23t 105145s902 ( j) issued by Respondent No.1 , the rmpugned Notice dated 03.03.2023 with DrN and Notice No.ITBA/AST/Ft14BA(SCN)t2O22-23t 1050397556(1) and proceedings in furtherance to it pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KARAN TALWAR Co-unsel for the Respondent Nos..t&2:SRl J.V.PRASAD (Sr. SC FOR INCOME rAx) !9r11_s9]!o_r lhe Respondent No.3 : SRI cAOt PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEpUTy SOL]CITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the foHowing ORDER r?1 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TI'I{ARAMJI WRIT PETITION N0.5349 0F 2024 ORDER:(per Hon'bte Si Justice P.SAM KOSHfl) Heard Mr. Karan Talwar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax DeparLment for respondents. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant Writ petition has been frled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; \"...to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other applicable writ declaring and setting aside the impugned order, dated 28.03.2023 with DIN and Notice No.lTB A / ASr / F / r48 A / 2022 -23 / I OS r 4S59O2 (1) issued by Respondent No. l, the Impug:ned Notice, dated O3.03.2023 with DIN and Notic; No.ITBA/ AST/F/ l48A(scNl /2o22-23l 1oso397ss6(1) and proceedings in furtherance to it as being w.ithout jurisdiction and in violation of principles Jf natural justice, patently illegal, arbitrary, violitive of Articles 14 and Article 19(1)(9) of the Constitution of India and to pass...\" 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended -7 2 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.5349 oJ 2O24 prot/isions of the Act which carne into effect from Ol.O4.2O2I, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section l48A and provide arr opportunit5r of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless m€rnner. 4. Whereas, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing OfIicer. In support of his contention, he relied upon the recent judgment rendered by this very Bench in Wp.No.25903 of 2022 e, batch, dated L4.O9.2O23 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hald, 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 ttre petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 4 PSK,J &, NTR,J w.P.No.5349 of 2024 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 a-foresaid batch matters, the right of the parties would stand reserved as is envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said order passed in the batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs. 9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed. Sd/. T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-'l, lncome Tax Office, Kothagudem 5071 17 Bhadradri Kothagudem District Telang€na. 2. The Pr. Chief Cornmissioner, lncome Tax Department, 1oth Floor, lncome Tax Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004. 3. The Secretary to the Government, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi-1'10O01. 4. One CC to Sri Karan Talwar, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri J.V.Prasad (Sr. SC FOR INCOM€ TAX)lOPUCl 6. One CC to Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA (OPUC) z. Two CD Copies a' To SA cu(t- HIGH COURT PSK,J & NTR,J DATED:29102t2024 ORDER WP.No.5349 of 2024 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 1 HE STal ( 'r J c i-) D E urn 2924 2 o -L a "