Nexgen Properties, Rep. By Managing Partner V. Income Tax Officer Ward15(1) and The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Hyderabad 4 and National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

WP/5627/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Nexgen Properties, represented by its managing partner, challenging an assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer under the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the assessment was conducted under the unamended provisions of the Act, which is not sustainable. The court referenced a previous judgment where similar issues were addressed, noting that the proceedings did not comply with the amended Section 148A, which mandates a faceless assessment process and an opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The court's decision was influenced by the procedural flaws in how the assessment was conducted, leading to the quashing of the assessment order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 804628 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal case
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: DUNDU MANMOHAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Faceless assessment; Jurisdictional issue; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 148A; 226

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTH 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: 5627 OF 2024 Between: Nexgen Properties, Rep. By Managing Partner' 6-73 Canara Nagar- U^ppal Busbepot, MedipallyMedchal, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500098 ...PETITIONER AND 1. lncome Tax Officer Ward15(1), I T TOWER, AC Guards, Masab Tank' Hvderabad - 500004 2. The Principal Commissioner Of lncome Tax Hyderabad 4' 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad - 500004- 3. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Qelhi, Ministry of Financ6, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-'1 10003. 4. The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax Hyderabad - 4' 1Oth Floor, C- Block, l.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad-500004. 5. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1,2nd Floor, E- Ramp,JawaharlalNehruStadium,Delhi-110003 ...RES'ONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Assessment Order dt.31 .01 .2024passed by the 3rdrespondent u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 1448 of the lncome-tax Act for A.Y.2018-19 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST lS 1147 12023- 24t1O60322525(1), which is passed as a conseqrrence of the order passed u/s 14SA(d) dt.26.04.2022 vide DIN No. ITBtuAST/F/'148N2O22- 23t1O42861513(.1 )and notice u/s 148 dt.26.04.2j22 vide DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/148 1t2O22- 2311042862877(1), issued by the JAO(1st respondent) instead of FA0(3rd respondent), as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under section 1s1 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 pursuant to the Assessment order dt.31 .01 .2o24passed by the 3rd respondent u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 1448 of the lncome{ax Act for A.y. 20'18-19 vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/SI147t2023-24 t1060322525 (1). Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V.PRASAD, SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.5627 oF 2o24 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.Manmohan Dundu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for respondents. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: \"to issue on dppropriate writ order or direction more porticulorly one in the noture ol Writ of Mondomus decloring the Assessment Order dt 31.01.2024 possed by the j'd respondent u/s 747 r w s 744 r w s 1448 of the lncome tox Act lor A.Y 2078-19 vide DIN No.|TBA/AST /5 /147 /2023 24/106oj22525(1), which is possed os o consequence of the order possed u/s 148A(d) dt 26.U.2022 vide otN No. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2O2223/1042861511(1) ond notice u/s 748 dt 26.04.2022 vide DIN No | BA/AST/S/148 1/2022 2i/1O428628741) issued by the JAO \" respondent) insteod of FA0(3'd respondent), os void, illegol ond controry to the provisions of lncome tox Act ond controry to the Principles ol Noturol Justice\". 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petilion is that under the amended 2 PSI(,J & MTR,J W.P,No.5527 oJ 2O24 provisions of the Act which carne into effect from Ol .O4.2021 , 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. 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 bv this very Bench in WP.No.259O3 of 2022 & 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 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. 3 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.5627 of 2024 6. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concemed, this Bench, while 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 raised bg the petittoner is sustained and. att tlese tuit petitions stands allowed on this uery juisdictional issue. Sine the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on tlrc point of jurisd.iction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and -decide the other issues roised bg tlrc petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an appropriate proceeding s. \" \"38. Sine tlrc Hon'ble Stprem.e Court had, in tLe case of Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time meosure ixercbing tle pouters under Article 142 of the Constitttiion of Indio, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court altowing tle petitions onlg on the proedural fiaut, the right conferred on the Reuenue uould remain resented to proceed further if tleg so utant from the stage of the ortler of tle Supreme Court in the ca* of Ashish Agaruta| supro.\" I 0 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-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable' 4 PSI(,J & MTR,J W.P.No.5627 of 2O24 8. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand 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, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1 2 3 lncome Tax Officer Ward15(1), I T TOWER, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500004 The PrinciLal Commissioner Of lncome Tax Hyderabad 4, lOth Floor, C- Block, l.T Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hydeiabad - 500004. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003 One CC to SRI DUNDU MANMOHAN, Advocate [OPUC] one cc to sRt J,V pRASAD, SC FOR TNCOME TnX 1OPuc1 Two CD Copies 4 5 6 PSK. GJP 1 /;t!, .u HIGH COURT DATED:0410312024 ORDER WP.No.5627 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GOSTS. $E S T41e ( o L) 0 6 APB 2tl2{ O6'SPATcaf z o t @c\"(i* Gua- "