Mrs. Fouzia Khan, Wo. Mr.M.H.A.Khan V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -10(1), I.T. Towers, A.C- Guards, Masabtank, Hyderabad and Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance

WP/32393/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Mrs. Fouzia Khan, the petitioner, challenging the legality of notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Department under sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2016-17. The petitioner argued that these were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and without proper application of mind, as they were based on the unamended provisions of the Act which require a different procedural approach, including faceless assessment and an opportunity of hearing. The court referenced a similar case (W.P.No.30153 of 2023) where it had already ruled on these issues, leading to the decision to allow the current writ petition on the same grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 796875 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2023
• 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
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 151; 148A(d)

Judgement Text

"[ 337e 1 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 32393 OF 2023 Between: Mrs. Fouzia Khan, Wo. Mr.M.H.A.Khan, aged about 58- years, 1-10-1'z16F6' Fiat ruo.6, B Block, kundan Towers, Mayuri Marg, Begumpet, Hyderabad' ...PETITIONER AND '1. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward -10(1), l.T. Towers, A.C- Guards' Masabtank, Hyderabad -500004. 2. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncorne Tax Department, Ministry of Finance' Room No' 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 't 10 003 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the conslitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the nature of wRlT oF MANDAMUS holding that the order passed by Respondent u/s.148A(d) of the Act, dt.3oto3l2o23 with DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/F 11 48N2O22-23/1 051 683062(1 ) and the notice dated 3olo3l2o23 issued under section l4B of the Act with DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/1 48_1 12022-231 1051 683258(1 ) for the assessment year 2016-'17, as being illegal, arbitrary and passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without application of mind and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section '151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the notice issued by the Respondent u/s.148 of the Act, dt.3OlO3l2O23 for the assessrnent yeat 2O1G17 with DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S,1148_112022-2311051683258(1) and all consequential proceedings thereto. Counsel for the Petitioner: SR! A. V. RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRlJ. V. PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER I I E e t I ! i I f I l I 1 { I I I ri : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIT AND THE HOIT'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI sI.P. No.32393 of2023 ORDER:@er aon'bLe Sri Justkp P'SA\" rOSII'? When the matter is taken up for hearing today' it has been informed t:y tne parties that an identical writ petition i'e'' W.P.No.30l53of3o23hasalreadybeenallowedanddisposedofby this Court uide order dated 30' 1O'2023' 2. [n view of the fact t]rat the identical matter has already been allowed by this Court, we are inclined to allow the instant writ petition also, in terms of the order passed in W'P'No'30153 of 2023 decided on 30.1O.2023 on similar terms. SECT]ON OFFICER To, 3. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this writ petition, shatl stand closed' No order as to costs' //rRUE coPY/'to'-*'?ltHmr#m3 I 1 2 The lncome Tax fficer' Ward -10(1)' l'T' Towers' A'C' Guards' Masabtank' Hvderabad -500004. XIIJ.li \"\"\", uti-l'iational Faceless Assessrnent^centre' lncome Tax ;;;il;i rtrii\"i'.irv or Finance' Room No' 4o 1' 2nd Floor' E+amp' Jai\"nrrr\"r Nehru Siadium, Delhi -'t10 003 b;;tctl si n' v. Rashu Ram' Advocate toPy^c-I... . il; aa io sri.t. V. Praiad, SC for lncome Tax [OPUC] 3 4 5. Two CD CoPies (Along with a coPY of the order' dated 30.10-2023 in W'P No 30153 ol 2023) GJ BS w' HIGH COURT DATED:2411112023 ORDER WP.No.32393 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS + \"?&a YP 5-1ul,, ( 1HE SI4 14: 2 0 0E[ 2023 z o['$parr:F.'j q 'J O o * * :, i: 7 I ii j I ! i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P. No.30153 of 2O23 ORI)ER:per aon'bte Sri Justice P.SAM Ko.SHY) He.ard 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. Pemsed the entire record. 2. The instant petition has been liled challenging *re 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 20 18- 19. 3. One of the contentions tl'rat the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which came into effect from O1.O4.2O21, 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 Offrcer. 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 14.09 .2023 vide W.P.No.259O3 ot 2022 and batch to t].e limited extent. 4. karned 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 and all these writ petitions stands allowed on this very jurisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point ofjurisdiction, we are not inclin€d to proceed further and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to be raised arrd contended in an appropriate proceedings- \" 38. Since the Hon''ble Supreme Court had, in tlle cas€ of Ashish Agarwal, supra, as a one time measure exercising the powers under Article 142 of the 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 the Revenue would remain reserved to proceed further if they so r','ant 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 also on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objecfion 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. ; t F I I i i 3 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 of the said batch. No order as to costs. 7 . Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. P.SATU KOSITY, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dated: 3O. 1O.2023 a'qs i i g I ! I I ! , : "