Mr. Vidyalankar Makkaoaty, S/o. M. Janardhana Sarma, aged 65 years, occ. As ricu ttu rist V. Assessment Unit, Income_Taxpgpartnl],alt, National e_Assessment Center, New Dethi and The Income Tax Officer.,Circtg !(r.),lyderabad, tT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad and The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Andhra pradesh And terangana, Hvderabad

WP/1048/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Vidyalankar Makkaoaty, 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 orders were arbitrary, illegal, and violated principles of natural justice as well as various articles of the Constitution of India and section 148A of the Income Tax Act. The court's decision was influenced by a previous judgment in a similar batch of writ petitions, which found procedural flaws in how the notices and orders were issued under the old provisions instead of the amended ones that require a faceless procedure and a hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 676916 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Aganval case
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Income Tax; Legal Challenge; Procedural Flaw; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 148A(d); 226

Judgement Text

"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 [ 337e ] ...PETITlONER WRIT PETITION NO:1048 0F 2024 Between: AND Mr. Vidyalankar Makkaoaty, S/o. M. Janardhana Sarma, aged 65 years. occ. As ricu ttu rist, H. No. z-2b s, Streiiu{J. r;'E;;i Er;;iii r.rb g,,\"i B iriei BIi\"i; nagar, Rangareddy District - sOo Ozb, teraftil;' -\",-' 1. Assessment Unit, lncome_Taxpgpartnl],alt, National e_Assessment Center. New Dethi, Rooni No.: 40i, r\"-Flo;;; i-il;;;,':;;r;;;i;ii6dj'bi;iffi: New Dethi - 1.10 OO3. 2. The lncome Tax Officer.,Circtg !(r.),lyderabad, tT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 5oO 0d4,'Tdt;\"si;,i.' ' ' 3. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax, Andhra pradesh And rerangana, Hvderabad. loo11 jrl9, e2!, bil FroJi\"ii Bbcl: i.}:i;;;iJ] r o_z_ 3, AC Guards, Hyderabad - 5OO OO4, i;tangriJ.' \" ...RESPONOENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia 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 . the order passed by the 2nd Respondent, u/s 14gA(d) of the lncome Tax Act, 196 r, dated 0610412022, bearing DrN and Notice No.. ,TBA/AST/F/14IArzozz-23t1o42s4orgo(1), for the Assessment year 2o1s - 16. and b. the notice issued by the 2nd Respondent, u/s ,l4g of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 12.04.2022, bearing DrN and Notice No.: rrBA/AST/s/148_112022- 2311042704930( 1), for the Assessment ye61 2O1S _ 16. as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void-ab-initio, viorative of the principres of naturar justice, apart from being // violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 26s of the constitution of lndia and sec 148A of the lncome Tax Act, ,1961, and 16 consequenfly 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 pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 2nd Respondent, u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, dated 1210412022, bearing DIN and Notice No.. trBA/AST/sii4B_1t2022- 2311042704930(1), for the Assessment year 2015 - 16, pending disposat of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondents: J V PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER ';.-:,r7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE N.TI'KARAMJI UIRIT PETITION No.lo4I OF 2024 ORDPR:(per Hon'ble Si Justice P,SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed 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/AST/F/ t48A/2022-23/ t042540790 (l), dated 06.04.2022 passed by respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2015-16 and the consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 06.04.2022, bearing DIN No.lTBA/AST / S / t48-L / 2022-23 I ro4270493o (tl. 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.O4.2O2|, the respondents, while proceeding under /' 2 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 provision 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 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 14.09.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hald, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Department does not dispute that the sajd objection was decided in the aforesaid batch of Writ Petitions. However, he further contended that apart from the a-foresaid 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 learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, while .Llz 3 disposing of said batch of writ petilions, had taken .note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: .37. The preliminary objection rqised by the petitioner is sustained and all these writ petitions stands allowed on this uery jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of jurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an app ropiate proceeding s. \" \"38. Since tLLe Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Aganaal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the potuers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allouing tlle petitions onlg on the procedural flau, the right confened on the Reuenue would remain reserued to proceed further if tLrcy so uant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agantal, supra.\" 7. In view of the same, we a.re 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 petiuons. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sha.ll stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SO/. K. SAI KUMARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ( To, 1 2 3 . Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No.. 401 ,2nd Fioor, E_R'amp, JawahaitaiMhiu'Siadiffi, New Delhi - 1 10 003. ].!e llcgmq Tax Officer, Cirqte 9(.1), Hyderabad,, I T Towers, AC Guards, MasaD lank, Hyderabad - 500 004. Telanoana. . The Principal. Chief Commissioner Of lnco-me Tax, Andhra pradesh And TeFlglna, Hyderabad, Roo11 N9.92!, gth Ftoor, B etoci, t.iio*eii,lO-Z_ 3, AC^Guards, Hyderabad - 500 OO4, Telangana.' . One CC to Sri AV A Siva Kartikeya, Advo6ate IOPUCI . One CC to Sri J V Prasad (SC foriniome fax) t'Op0di . Two CD Copies 4 5 6 TJ GJP .F I HIGH COURT DATED:1110112024 ORDER WP.No.1048 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. S 1 14 FEB I r 2 T (. 1 q c ,J -.-.,- * "