Mr. Venkatesham Kodipyaka, S/o. Mr. Rajesham Kodipyaka, aged 67 years, Occ. Retired Government Employee V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nizamabad and The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh And Telangana, Hyderabad and Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi

WP/1030/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Venkatesham Kodipyaka, who filed a writ petition challenging the orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Department under the un-amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner argued that the notices were arbitrary, illegal, and violative of natural justice and various articles of the Constitution of India. The court examined whether the proceedings were in compliance with the amended provisions of the Act, which came into effect on April 1, 2021, requiring notices to be issued in a faceless manner and providing an opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The court referenced a similar batch of writ petitions it had previously decided, which also dealt with jurisdictional issues under the amended provisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 796237 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal vs. Revenue
• 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 Year 2015-16; Faceless Proceedings; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 148A(d); 226

Judgement Text

"[ 337e 1 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: 1030 OF 2024 Between: AND 1. 2. 3. Mr. Venkatesham Kodipyaka, S/o. Mr. Rajesham Kodipyaka, aged 67 years, Occ. Retired Government Employee, H.No.1-1$0/'1lA, Behind Venkateshwara Theatre, Banswada, Nizamabad, Banswada S.O. - 503 187, Telangana. ...PETITIONER The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nizamabad, lncome Tax Office' 6-2-'156/3' Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503 002, Telangana The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax, Andhra Pradesh And Telangana, Hyderabad Room No. 922, glh Floor, 'B' Block, l.T.Towers, 10-2-3, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department' National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No.4Ot, 2nd Flbor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the 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.theorderpassedbythelstRespondent,u/s148A(d)ofthelncomeTaxAct' 1961, dated 19.04.2022, bearing DIN and Notice No.lTBAlASTlFl148N2022- 23t1042778978(1), for the Assessment Year 2015 - 16; & b. the notice issued by the 1st Respondent, u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 19.o4.2022, bearing DIN and Notice No.|rBA/AST/st14B_1t2022- 2311042779371(1), forthe Assessment year 2015 - 16; arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, barred by time, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being viorative of Articres 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the constitution of lndia and Sec. 14BA of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 preased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the notice issued u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 19.o4.2022, bearing DrN and Notice No. I TBA/AST/S r 1 48 _1 I 2022-23 t 1 o 42r 7 g3r1 ( 1 ), for the Assessment yea r 20 1 5 - 16, pending disposal of the above Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.V.A.SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. SUNDARI R.plSUpATl, SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAruJI IPRIT PETITION No.1O3O OF 2024 ORI)ER:@er Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sundari R. Pisupati, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record 2. The instant Writ Petition has been Iiled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 196 1 (for short, \"the Act\") bearing DIN No.ITBA/ASTlFl r48Al2022-231 to42778978 (1), dated 19.M.2022 passed by respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2015-16 artd the consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 1.9.04.2022, bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST / S / | 48-t I 2022-23 / tO427 7 937 t (1],. 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which came into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while procee{lng under 1 Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148A and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended pro,rision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. 4 . Whereas, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Off-rcer. 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.O9.2025 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, learned 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. 6. So far as this contention of the leamed counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, while 3 disposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminary objection roised by the petittoner is sustained and all these urit petitions sronds allouted on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of jurisdiction, uE are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised bg the petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an appropiate proceeding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the cose of Ashish Agaruta supra, os a one-time measure exercising the pouers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted tLe Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allowing the petitions onlg on the procedural flaut, the right confeted on the Reuenue would remain reserued to proceed further if theg so uant from the stoge of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agaruta supra.\" 7. In rriew of the sarne, 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 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. 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is 4 envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 3g 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. //TRUE COPY// SD/. K. SAI KUMARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTI N OFFICER To, 6 BSR GJP 1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nizamabad, lncome Tax Office, 6-2-'156/3, Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad - 503 002, Telangana 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax, Andhra pradesh And Telangana, Hyderabad Room No. 922, gth Floor, 'B' Block, l.T.Towers, 10-2-3, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana. 3. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No.401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003. 4. One CC to SRI A.V.A.SIVA KARTIKEYA Advocate IOPUCI 5. One CC to M/s. SUNDARI R.PISUPAT|, SC FOR TNCOME TAX tOpUCl Two CD Co res - HIGH COURT DATED: 1110112024 ORDER WP.No.1030 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS .( Or: a- o .]--. t'a t- a ilj) t ttB 1t2 i ,f, ,, l\"r ,:,r'r.:'. "