Mr. Vishnuvardhan Reddy Kichugari V. Union of India

WP/34456/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Mr. Vishnuvardhan Reddy Kichugari challenging the assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the order was passed without following the amended provisions of the Act, which mandate a faceless assessment and proper notice. The respondents included the Union of India, Ministry of Finance, and various income tax authorities. The court found that the procedures followed were not in accordance with the amended law, leading to the quashing of the order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 686066 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.30153 of 2023, W.P.No.25903 of 2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GADI KUMAR; SUNDARI PISUPATI
• Assessee Lawyers: P SHEKAR REDDY
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 148A(d); 14BA(d)

Judgement Text

"'//' HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA T PETI ION NO: 34456 OF 023 [ 33e7 ] 26.04.2022 u/s. 14BA(d) and Notice issued by the Section 1 48 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 dated Between: AND 1. passing the Order dated Respondent No.2 under Mr. Vishnuvardhan Reddy Kichugari, S/o. Mr. Prabhakar Reddy .Kichugari' aoeA'aUout -S't. Ry o. Plcit No. BZg, Road No.40, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad' T6langana - 500 033. PAN. AGMPK7129C ...PETITIONER Unionoflndia,MinistryofFinanceRep.byitsSecretary,l66-8NorthBlock' New Delhi - 110 001 . lncome Tax Officer, Ward 14 (1 ), lncome Tax Towers, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Telangana-500004. The Princioal Commissioner Of lncome Tax -1, lncome Tax Towers, Masab Tank, Hyd'erabad, Telangana- 500004. The National Faceless Assessment centre, lncome Tax Department Ministry of Finance Govt. of lndia, New Delhi ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Cdnstitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to i. lssue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly, one' in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order passed by the Respondent No'2 in 2 3 4 26.04.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, void ab initio, violative of the principles of natural justice and being violative of Articles 14,19 and 265 of the constitution oflndiaandconsequently.ii.Setasidetheorderdated26.o4.2o22uls.148A(d) and Notice issued by the Respondent No.2 under section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 dated 26.04.2022 calling for the return of income of the Petitioner for AY. 201 8-19 and any consequent proceedings as lacking in jurisdiction. iii.and/ or pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P SOMA SHEKAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 and 4: GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 and 3: M/S. SUNDARI P PISUPATI The Court made the following: ORDER .€ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA lIIRIT PETITION No.34456 0F 2023 ORDER @er Hon'ble Si Justice P-SAM KOSHY) When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it has been informed by the parties that an identical Writ Petition i'e' ' W.P.No.3O153 of 2023 has already been allowed and disposed of uide order, dated 3O. 10'2023. 2.Inviewofthefactthattheidenticalmatterhasalreadybeen aliowed by this Court, we are inclined to allow this Writ Petition in terms of the order passed in W'P'No'30153 of 2023 decided on 30.1O.2023 on similar terms. 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs' /ITRUE COPY// SD/. C. PRAVEEN KUMAR -iSsliiiiiri nEGIFTRAR 5,/ SECTION OFFICER to'r. an\" Secretary, Union of lndia' Ministry of Finance' 166-8 North Block' New , R?'L;ti3f3hcer, wa'a 14 1' lncome rax rowers' Masab rank' . +x3\"Ji:3ldrl33[n;i:1,\"\"er of tncome rax l, tncome rax rowers, Masab \" +ell,.Ly j\"EiP3*[3'3],?133sme nr .centre, I ncome rax Department Ministry - .i'Fii,frt\" Govt' of lndia' New Delhi. . . . 5. One Cc to Sri P' il;;5r;;i;' n\"oqv' Advocate toPUCl 6. 6;;66 i\" v,. .*{.g,g\"fi11idf $t $,i:.\",iru\"I::f9[0Y,\"]ro,,\"r 7. One CC to Sri Gadi I 8. Two CD CoPies TJ GJ (Along with the Order Copy 30'10'2023 in W'P'No'30153 OF 2023) 'r7- l i HIGH COURT DATED:2211212023 ORDER WP.No.34456 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. HE ST4IS 2 0 ,lAN 2024 t).i-cp,, T C q z o o o .t * L l-D 7 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No. 3O153 of2023 ORDER: per ao n'ble Si Justice P.SAI,I KOSHY) Heard Mr. A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record. 2. The instant petition has been filed challenging the Assessment Order passed by respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\") dated 25.04.2022 for the Assessment Year 2018- 19. 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 .04.202 1, the respondents while proceeding under 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. Whereas, it has been contended by the petitioner that in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Juridictional Assessing Officer. In respect of the said objection that the petitioner had raised, he relied upon the recent batch of writ ! 2 petitions decided by this very Bench on 14 .O9.2023 vide W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch to the limited extent. 4. Learned counsel for the Department would not dispute of having decided the said objection in the aforesaid batch matters. However, learned counsel submits 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 Department is concerned, this Bench, while disposing of W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch had taken note of the same in paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which is reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminary objection raised by the petitioner is sustained arrd all these &Tit petitions stands allowed on this very jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to be raised and contended in an appropriate proceedings.\" 38. Since the Hontrle Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powers under Article 142 of tbe Constitution of India, permitted the Revenue to proceed under the substituted provisions, and this Court allowing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the right conferred on ttre Revenue would remain reserved to proceed further if they so want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 6. In view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition a-Iso 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 unamended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. ..,r As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the right of the respondents would stand reserved as is envisaged in paragraph Nos.37 & 38 ofthe said batch. No order as to costs. 7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. P.SAM KOSIIY, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dated:30. 1O.2023 aqs 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LIIXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY UI.P. No. 3O153 of2O23 Qter the Hon'ble Srt Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Dated: 30.1O.2O23 aqs "