Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited Nookapally V. Office of The Income Tax Officer

WP/11367/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by various Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Societies against the Income Tax Department, challenging the assessments made under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioners argued that the assessments were arbitrary, illegal, and violated principles of natural justice, among other constitutional provisions. The court examined the procedural adherence of the Income Tax Department in light of the Finance Act, 2021, and relevant Supreme Court directives, leading to the quashing of the assessments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 765686 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: 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: J SUNITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: THANNERU KUMAR
• Keywords: Assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 144B; 148A; 226

Judgement Text

"[ 3403 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NOs.1 1355,11357.11367, 11368.11381. 11382, 11401.11416 & 1',|419 oF 2024 WP NO: '1135 F 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited, Kodimial, Rep. By-.lts Secret6ry, Vodnala Gangadhar, S/O. Dharmaiah, Aged About z16 Years, RIO' Kodimial' Vill and Mdl , -Karimnagar,Karimnagar 505501 , Telangana, lndia PAN. AABAP7457Q AssessmenlYeat.2Ol9-2O ...pETt,oNER AND 1. Office of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 2,Karimnagar,Telangana State. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax Telangana glt! &i\" Hyderabad,lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 500 028, Telangana. 3. The N;tional Faceless Assessment Center,, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 4. The Central Board of Direct Taxes,, Represented by its Chairman' Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 5. The Un-ion of lndia,, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenu6, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110 9:Ja.r*orrr. 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 direclion more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, declaring the order passed by the lncome Tax Authorities (National Faceless E- Assessrn€nt Centre) completed the assessrnent U/S 147 read with section 144BIi the lncome{ax Act Date of order o1 27 -12-2023, DIN |TEA/AST/5114712023- - 24t1OSgOg7731(1)for the Assessment Year 2O19-2O determining the total income of Rs. 29,73,718/- as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab- initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of A(icles 14, t9(txg) and 265 of the constitution of rndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequenfly set aside the same in the interests of iustice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt THANNERU CHA|TANYA KUMAR Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL WPNO: 11357 OF 2024 Between: AND 1. 2. ErlllZ_.Aglp-rlt-lil9 Cg-Operative Society Limited Sarangapur, Rep. by trs )ecretafy, Mohammed lsmail, S/o. lbrahim Mohammed-, Aged AOou[ Ot X:^?r:,^fl9,P+1ary Asricutrure_Co-Op,.Sarangapur Viil and [,{ii Karrrn;;s;; urst 5U5454, tetangana, lndia pAN. AABAP7441A Assessment year.20i9_ 20 ...PETITIONER Office of The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1, Karimnagar,Telangana State. The Principa.l Ctief Commissioner of lncome Tax_Telangana and A,p, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, HyOerZbad _ 500 Oi8, Telangana. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi J 4 The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Rerenue, Ministry of Finance, Goveinment or tnilii, slcretariat Buiraings, ' New Delhi - 110 001. 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry oi Finance, Ndw Delhi _ 110 0O 1-. ' Petition under Articte 226 of the Constiturion of tndia ,,rt;ffii:i',;tH: circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, declaring the order passed by the 3rd (Nationar Faceress E-Assessment centre) compreted the assessment uls 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome{ax Act Date of order of 29-o 1 -2024, Dr N rrBtuAST/ s r 1 4r t2o23-24r 1 0601 B2o2q1 ) for the Assessment Year 2o19-2o determining the totar income of Rs. s6,26,137^ as arbitrary, iflegar, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural iustice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 , and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR - Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR- Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI - SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for Respondent Nos. 4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, - DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL . WP NO: 11367 OF 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited Nookapally, Rep. By lts Secretary The Society, Pingili Anil Kumar, S/o. Ram Reddy, Aged About 38 Years, Ryo. Nookapally Vill, Malyal Mdl ,Karimnagar 505452 , Telangana, lndiaPAN.AABAPT43ORAssessmentYear.2Ol9-20 ...pE,.oNER AND 1. Of{ice of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 2, Karimnagar,Telangana State. - 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax -Telangana and A.P, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500 028, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 4. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, Minisky of Financ€, Government of India, Secretariat Buildings, r New Delhi - 110 001. 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Departrnent of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - , ].1*O=0Jioil=**ra Petition under Arlicle 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 order passed by the lncome Tax Authorities (National Faceless E-Assessrnent Centre) completed the assessment UIS 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome-tax Act Date of Order of 05-03- - 2024, DIN ITBA/AST/S/147 t2023-24t1062035S40{ 1)-for the Assessment Year 2O1g-2O determining the total income of Rs. 9,62,5331-as arbitrary, illeg€|, bad in - law, withoul jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(t)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice, Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR -- Counsel for Respondent Nos. I to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR - Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX - Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, _ DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL WP-XOrfl1l68 OF 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited Manakondur, Rep. By lts Secretary, Pqkala Laxma Reddy, S/o. Thirupathi Reddy, Aged Aboui 52 Years, Ryo H No, Manakondur Vill and Mdl Karimnagar-Dist 505469, Telangana, lndia PAN Ar' ,ifu4l7425M Assessment Year 2O1A-2O ...pETtTtoNER AND 1. Office Of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward-2,Karimnagar,Telangana State. - 2. The PrincipalChief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Elangana And Ap, Hyderabad,, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyd6rabad-500 b2S, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New - Delhi 4. The Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, Minislry of Finance, Goveinment of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 5. The Union Of lndia, Represented Hy lts Secretary To The Government, Depa(ment of Revenue, Ministry ot Finance, New Delhi ...REspoNoENTS 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 order passed by the lncome Tax Authorities (National Faceless E-Assessment centre) completed the assessment UIS 147 read with section 1448 of lhe lncometax Act Date of Order of Date Zl- 02-202 4, D I N I TBtuAST/ S I 1 47 t 2023 -24 I 1 06 1 SSg 422(l) for the Assessment year 2019-20 determining the total income of Rs. 45,76,451/- as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1xg) and 265 of the constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR - Counsel for Respondent Nos. I to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR - Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX - Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, - DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL- WP NO: 11381 OF 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited Poodur, Rep. By lts Secretary The Society, Anumall Rajender Reddy, S/O. Gopal Reddy, Aged About 43 Years, R/O.Poodur Vii , Kodimyal Mdl, Kairmanagar 505501, Telangana, lndia PAN.AABAPT 436K Assessment Yeat.2O19-20 ...pETt,oNER AND 1. Office Of The lncome f ax Officer 2, Karimnagar,Telangana State. - 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Telangana And Ap, Hyderabad,, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New - Delhi. 4. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1'10 001. 5. The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, - Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - ,1-O*O=OJrOnr=rra- Petition under Adicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstanc€s stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court rnay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, declaring the order passed by the 3rd (National Faceless E-Assessment Centre) completed the assessment U/S 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome{ax Act Date of Order of 2OlO3t2O24, ITBA/AST/Si147 t2o23-24l1}O 3O2g4SO(1f1or the Assessment Yeat 2O19-2O determining the total income of Rs.7,43,03,7341 as arbitrary, illegal, bad in.law, without jurisdic{ion, void- ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justic€ apart from being violative of Articles 14, 1q1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Sec. '148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR' ' Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI ' SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX-- Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, - DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL WP NO: fi3A2OF 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Co Operative Society Limited Thakkallapally, Rep. By its ,--- Secretary, Komuravelly Manoj Kumar, S/0. Navakoti, Aged About 42 Years, Ryg [ry9. t_-?1 ]lglttfqtlgqally , Malyala. Mdl, Kalmnagar 50s452 , Telansana, _ lndia PAN AABAP7459A Assessment Year 2O19-2O ...pETt,oNER AND 1. Office Of The lncome Officer, Ward 2,Karimnagar,Telangana state '- 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Telangana And Ap, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500 028, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi 4. The Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Represented By lts Chairman,Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi 5. The Union Of lndia, Represented By lts Secretar To Goveminent,Department of Revenue, Ir,'linistry of Flnance. New Delhi ...RES'.NDENTS - Petition under Anide 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 order passed by the 3rd (National Faceless E-Assessment Cenlre) completed the assessment U/S 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome{ax Act Date of Order of 18-03-2024, DIN ITBA/AST/Si14712O23- 2411062823841(1) for the Assessment Year 2019-20 determining the total income of Rs. 7,13,937/-. as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 1a, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside the same in the inlerests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR - Counsel for Respondent Nos. I to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI ^ SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, - DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL - WP NO: 11401 OF 2024 Between: Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited Jagtial, Rep. By lts Secretary, Gajengi Venu, SiO. Gangaram, Aged About 46 Years, R/O. H No 4-2-70 , Jagtiyal Post and Mdl, Karimnagar Dist 505327 , Telangana, lndia PAN. AABAP7434M AssessmenlYear. 2O19-20 ...pEflfloNER AND '1. Office of The lncome Tax Officer Ward 2,, Karimnagar,Telangana State. - 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Telangana And A P, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi 4. The Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Represented By lts Chairman,, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi 5- The Union Of lndia, Represented By lts Secretary To The Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi ,..RES'.NDENT' Petition under Arlicle 226 of the 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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order passed by the lncome Tax Authorities (National Faceless E-Assessment Centre) completed the assessment lJlS 147 read with s€ction '1448 of the lncometax Act Date of Order of 1 810312024, DIN ITBA/AST/SI1 47 12023-241106281 3260( 1 ) for the Assessment Yeat 2019-20 determining the total income of Rs. 10,26,51,509/-. as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart frorn being violative of Articles 1a, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia aM Sec. 148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1 961 , and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANN€RU CHAITANYA KUMAR ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR Ms. SUNDARI RPISUPATI - SENPR SC FOR INCOME TAX - Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRt B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR - SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, -- DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL WP NO: 1'1416 OF 2024- Between: frimary Agriculture Co-Operative Society L!mi!ed, pegadapally, Rep. By lts Secretary the So_ciety, Thadakamadla Gopat Reddy, Slo.Rali'ReOOy, dged ?Pout 47 ye1s, llQ_lr1mary Agricutrure Co-Op , pegadapatiy Vill aird n7d[ Karimnagar Dist 505531, Telangana, lndia pAN AAB-AP7423O Assessmeni Year- 2018-19 ...PETITIONER AND 1. Office of The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax Circle 1, Karimnagar,Telangana State. 2. The Principal Ctrief Com-mis_sioner of lncome Tax, Telangana and A.p, Hyderabad, tT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, HyaerjOaO - SOO OZb, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 4. The central Board of Drrect Taxes, Represented by its chairman. Deoarrmenr of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Goveinment of rnijia, s\"cretariii euiiJings, ' New Delhi - 1 10 OOi . 5. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry oi Finance, Ndw Delhi _ i tO OOi. '' Petition under Atticte 226 of the Constitution of tndia ,r\"ri\"1t?ff?5| iH - 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 lvrandamus decraring the order passdd by the rncome Tax Authorities (National Faceless E-Assessment centre) ompleted the assessment uls 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome-tax Act Date of order 06-03-2024, DIN lrBA/AST/sl 1 47 12023-241 1 o62122o}sl1) for the Assessment year 201 B-1 9 determining the total income of Rs. 1,58,63,913/- as arbitrary, illegat, bad in law, without jurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1Xg) and 265 of the constitution of lndiaand sec.148A of the rncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequenfly set aside the same in the interests of iustice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt THANNERU CHA|TANYA KUMAR - Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR - Ms. SUNDART RptSUpATt - SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAJ, - Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR - SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, . DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL - WP NO: 11 19 0F 2024 AND 1. 2. Between: Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Limited Thirumalapoor, Rep. By lts Secretary, Mohammed Khurshid Ahmed, S/O. Peer Mohammed, Aged llout 52 Yeais, R/O. Thirmalapur-Vill , Kodimyala-Mdl, Karimnagar 505501 Telangana, lndia PAN. AABAP7458B Assessment Year. 2019-20 ...pETtTtoNER Office of The lncome Tax Officer Ward 2, Karimnagar,Telangana State. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of lncome Tax Telangana And Ap, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad The National Faceless Assessment Center, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi The Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Represented By lts Chairman, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi The Union Of lndia, Represented By lts Secretary To The Government, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi ...RES'ONDENTS _ Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the 3 4 5 circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order passed by the 3rd (National Faceless E-Assessment Centre) completed the assessment U/S 147 read with section 1448 of the lncome-tax Act Date of Order of 12-03-2024' DIN ITBtuAST/S/14712023-2411062476835(1) for the Assessment Yex 2019-2O determining the total income of Rs. 4,56,99,365/- as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law' without iurisdiction, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, lql Xg) and 265.of the Constitution of lndia and Sec. '148A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, and consequently set aside lhe same in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANNERU CHAITANYA KUMAR ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Ms. J. SUNITHA, COUNSEL FOR- Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI - SENIOR SC FOR INCOME TAi- Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI B. MUKHERJEE, COUNSEL FOR -. SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, OEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL - The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NOs.1135s. 113s7. tL367. 11368. 11381. 11382, 11401. 1 1416 & Lt4t9 0F 2024 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon'ble Justice Sujoy Paul) . Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner(s), Ms. J. Sunitha, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Ms.Sundari R.pisupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents-lncome Tax Department in all the writ petitions and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Cadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents-Union of India in all the writ petitions. 2. Regard being had to the similarity of the question involved, on the joint request of the parties, the matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order. 3. It is common ground taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) that in furtherance of Financ e Act, 2O2I , re- assessment process stood modified but the respondents have not taken care of it and therefore notices issued under Section l4g of the Income Tax Act, 196 I cannot sustain judicial scrutiny. Since notices are bad in lau,, the consequential orders are a_lso bad in lau,. 7 ( 4 . During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties agreed that curtains on this issue are hnally drawn by this Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and other connected matters, decided by common order dated 14.O9.2023. The parties agreed that this matter may be disposed of in terms of the Common Order dated 14.09.2023. 5 This Court in the said order dated 14.09.2023 in W.P.No.25903 of 2022, held as under: \"35. ln view of the aforesaid discussions, it is by now very clear that the procedure to be followed by the respondent-Oepartment upon treating the notices issued for reassessment being under Section 1484, the subsequent proceedings was mandatorily required to be undertaken under the substituted provisbns as laid down under the Finance Act, 2021.ln lhe absence of which, we are constrained to hold that the procedure adopted by the respondent-Department is in cont.avention to the statute i.e. the Finance Act, 2021, at the first instance. Secondly, it is also in direct contravention to the directives issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agan/yal, supra. 36. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned notices issued and the proceedings drawn by the respond€ntoepa(ment is neither tenable, nor sustainable. The notices so issued and the procedure adopted being per se illegal, deserves to be and are accordingly set aside/quashed. As a consequence, all the impugned orders getting quashed, the consequential orders passed by the respondent Department pursuant to the notices issu€d under Sectbn 147 and 148 would also get quashed and it is ordered accordingly. The reason we are quashing the consequential order is on the principles that when the initiation of the proceedings itself was procedurally wrong, the subsequent orders also gets nullifaed automatically. 37. The preliminary obiection 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 of jurisdiction, we are not inclined to proceed further and decide 3 the other issues raised by the petitioner which stands reserved to be raised and contended in an appropriate proceedings. 38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Agarwal, suprar as a one-time measure exercising the powers under Anicle 142 of the Constitution of lndia, permifted 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 want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal, supra. 39. No order as to costs.\" 6. [n view of the consensus arrived, the impugned Show Cause notices and consequential orders passed in this batch of writ petitions are set aside. Liberty is reserved to both the parties to take respective stand and to proceed in accordance with law as per paragraph No.3B of the order dated 14.09.2023 in W.P.No.259O3 of 2022. The writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTBAR <.../ secrroruoorrrcrn To, MBC GJP 1. The Offlce of The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 2, Karimnagar,Telangana State. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax Telangana and A.P,, Hyderabad, lT Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 500 028, Telangana. 3. The National Faceless Assessment Center,, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 4. The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 1 10 001 . 5. The Secretary to the Government, Depa(ment of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110001. 6. The Office of The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 1, Karimnagar,Telangana State. 7. One CC to Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Smt. Sundari R Pisupati, Senior SC for lncome Tax [OPUC] 9. Two CD Copies o I i. I I I I HIGH COURT DATED: 2610412024 F- 1HE S14 o Y O O 0 [ i|jrl 20a ( (' 1z ,j z p COMMON ORDER WRIT PETITION NOs.11355' 11357, 11367, 1 1368, 11381 11382, 11401, 11 416 & 114190F 2024 l$ , i ;, i ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS ot4'' w ..',; ( I1r'.:',, "