Ms. Sulochana Mandadi V. Union of India

WP/7023/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Ms. Sulochana Tvlandadi, the petitioner, challenging various notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Department under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that these actions were taken under the unamended provisions of the Act, which do not comply with the current legal requirements for faceless assessments and proper hearings. The respondents included the Union of India, Ministry of Finance, and various officials from the Income Tax Department. The court's decision was influenced by a precedent set in a similar batch of writ petitions, where it was held that such proceedings must adhere to the amended provisions of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 721757 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Article 14 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B MUKERJEE; VIJAY PUNNA
• Assessee Lawyers: V ANEESH
• Keywords: Arbitrary; Faceless assessment; Illegal; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 143(2); 144B; 148A(b); 148A(d); 156

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 7023 OF 2024 Between: Ms. Sulochana tvlandadi, Aged about 41 years, D/o Mr. M. Sura Reddy. Occupation. Homemaker, Rbsident of # 3, IMilan Apartments, Saraswathi Nagar Colony, Lothukunta, tVledchallvlalka.lgiri District, Telangana - 500015 ...PETITIONER AND 1 Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi Represented by its Secretary Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax, Aayakar Bhavan Basheerbagh Hyderabad Office Of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward '1 lncome Tax Office Krishna Nagar Colony Suryapet Telangana - 508213 The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department National Faceless Assessment Centre Room No 401 2nu Floor E Ramp Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Delhi - 110003 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of Ihe constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ. order. direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the(a)Notice dated 23-03.2022 issued by the Respondent No. 3 under Section 148A(b) of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 (Act),(b)order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 3 under Section 148A(d) of the Act,(c)Notice dated 26.04.2022 issued by the Respondent No. 3 under section 148 of the Act(d )consequential lntimation Letter daled 27.o1.2023 issued by the Respondent No. 4.(e)Notice dated 08.06-2023 issued by the 2 3 4 Respondent No. 4 under Section 143(2) rlw Section 147 of the Act.(f)Notice dated 30.06.2023 issued by the Respondent No_ 4 under Section 142(1) of the Act,(g)Notice dated 25.09.2023 issued by the Respondent No. 4 under Section 142(1) of the Act,(h)Notice dated 05.01.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 4 under Section 142(1) of the Act.(i)Show Cause Notice dated 10.02.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 4,(j)Notice of Demand dated 28.02.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 4 under Section 156 of the Act,(k)Assessment Order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Respondent No. 4 under Section 147 rlw Section 144B of Act and all the consequential proceedings as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the lncome Tax Act. 1961 and Article 14 of the Constitution of lndia. 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 the operation of the Assessment Order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Respondent No- 4 under Section 147 rlw Section 1448 of Act and all the consequential proceedings. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. ANEESH Counsel for the Respondent No.'t: SRI B. MUKERJEE REPLRESENTING FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4: SRI VIJAHAY K PUNNA, SC The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSITY AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.7O23 OF 2024 ORDER:per Hon'bte Sri Justice P,SAM KOSHY/ The instant Writ Petition has been hled by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: '...to issue an appropiate u.tit order direction more particularly one in th,e nature of a Wit of Mandamus declaring the (a) Notice dated 23.03.2O22 issued bg the Respondent No.3 under Section 148A(b) of tLrc Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') (b) Order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the Respondent No.3 und-er Section 148A(d) of the Act (c) Notice dated 26.O4.2022 bsued bg th.e Respondent No.3 under Section 148 of the Act (d) arseqtential Intimation Letter dated 27.01.2023 issued bg the Respondent No.4 (e) Notice d.ated O8.O6.2023 bsued bg the Respondent No.4 und-er Section 143(2) r/ut Section 147 of the Act (fl Notice dated 30.06.2023 i.ssued by tle Respondent No.4 under Section 142(1) of the Act (g) Notice dated 25.O9.2O23 issued bg the Respond-ent No.4 under Section 142(1) of tle Act (h) Notice dated O9.O1.2024 issued bg tlrc Respondent No.4 under Section 142(1) of the Act (i) Shou Cause Notice dated 10.02.2024 issued bg the Respondent No.4 0 Notice of Demand dated 28.O2.2O24 issued bg tle Respondent No.4 under Section 156 of the,4ct (k/ Assessment Order dated 28.02.2024 passed bg th.e Res9nndent No.4 under Section 147 r/ trt Section 1448 of Act and all the consequential proceed,ings as illegal, arbitrary, utitlnut jurisdiction and contrary to the prouisions of the Income Tox Act 1961 and Anicle 14 of the Constitution of Ind.ia and pass...\" 2 2. Heard Mr.V.Aneesh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B.Mukerjee, learned counsel representing Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor Genera_I of India, for respondent No.l and Mr.Vrjhay K punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax, for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record. 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raisecl in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which came into ellect from OL.O4.2O2l, the respondents, rvhile proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, 'uvere 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 martner. 4. Whereas, Iearned 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.259O3 of 2022 & 3 batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, learned Starding 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 learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, whiie disposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note o[ the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 3g which are reproduced herein under: i , '37. The _preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustained and all these tarit petitions staids all6u_,ed. on this uery jurisdictional issue. Since tlte impugned notices and_ orders are getting qlLashed on the poiit oy iu*aiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decid.e the oth.er tssues raised bg the petitioner tahich stands reserued_ to be roised qnd contend.ed in an appropriate proceedtngs.\" \"!5.. . Sln9e the Hon'ble Supreme Court had., in the case of Ashish Agarulal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the pouers under Article 142 of th,e Constitution of India, pennitted. the Reuenue to proceed. und.er the suistituted. prouisions, and this Court ollouing the petitions onLg on the 4 procEdural Jlatl, the ight confened on the Reuenue tltould remain reserued to proceed further if theA so uant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi-sh Agaruta| supra.\" To, 7. In view 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-arnended provision which is othenvise not sustainable' 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would starld 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. Consequently, miscellareous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed' sD/- P PADMAN1,*ET,EFRH /'TR,E coPY\" 'EcTloN o*Y\"'* Union of lndia' Ministry of Finance' North Block' New Delhi Represented by its it*'ifl\"!:rfr :T:'-:::l.l::li:::,j:iil-'.:'Hl\"T1.,* ff *!i*df ii'\"'*i#fr iii'Ii*m'*'r'r'r':'3ffi i*\"n\" A.l: 3E |:Ti J; h'+'\",',: \" f fll\"f : :\"# ?'\"FJ i'o' c \" n or I n d i a to P u cl 1. 2. 3. 4. 5 6 7 TJ GJP Two CD CoPies i HIGH COURT DATED:1910312024 ORDER WP.No.7023 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. r- i i7i 7'ii tiiiY ?l?4 I 1 /.. r:) io a..' it.. ' l- @ ap,'^ 6ur co: /\"tx --:-. i "