Rama Xrishna, S/o. Sri Nand Kumar Gandewar V. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance and The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Adilabad

WP/6242/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Rama Xrishna challenging the orders issued by the Income Tax Department under sections 147, 144, and 148 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner argued that the orders were arbitrary, illegal, and violated the provisions of sections 148A and 149 of the Act, as well as the circular issued by the CBDT and section 151A of the Act. The main contention was that the reopening of the assessment was initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer without adhering to the amended provisions that require faceless proceedings and proper notice under Section 148. The court, referencing a previous batch of writ petitions, found procedural irregularities in how the orders were issued, leading to the allowance of the writ petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799303 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Aganua
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 147 of the Act, Section 144 of the Act, Section 148A of the Act, Section 149 of the Act, Section 151A of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUNDARI R PISUPATI
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Procedural Flaw; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 144; 149; 148A; 151A

Judgement Text

"ri' rl :li ,;' .1? t- HIGH\"COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA n $ ON N/ DAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF I 4ARCH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) [ 337e ] ...PETITIONER il i Between: T.WO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR I # pRESENT flt THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY il AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI :{ trwnrr PETrroN No: 6242 oF 2024 u,- il R[ma Xrishna, S/o. Sri Nand Kumar Gandewar, aged about 46 , Kolipura, Adilabad - 504001. I t: rll ri ii UT Sri Gandewar years, 2-4-306 AND '1 . Assessment it, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax 't i l. ..1. i I i,ii r il ri.{{ li , it i; ,ti ,l ,l{ , Ii {lr i,ll ,tll Ii$ .i1 l: Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehril Stadium, Delhi - '1 10 003. 2. The lncome Ta*lOfficer, Ward - 1, Adilabad - 504106. d ..RESPoNDENTs ,1 Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the d circumstances statedf in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass un olPd\"r. or direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OF t MANDAMUS holdingFlhat the order passed by 1\"t Respondent u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 1448 of tti$e n\"t, dt.O203.2024 with DIN No.lTBA/AST/5114712023- 24t106187971t(t) foidthe Ay.2O19-2O, as arbitrary, iilegat, bad in taw, void ab 'l initio, apart from bein$ violative of provisions of section '148A and section 149 of ,.ttt irl, , ti ir the Act and also .oiftrrry to the circular issued by CBDT and provisions of fl section 15'lA of the Act, and consequently set aside the order passed by 1St L{ Respondent u/s. 147ffi.w.s. '144 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, d1.O2.O3.2024 with DIN No.|TBA/AST/S|147tfr23- 2411061879711 (1) for the Ay.2019-20 and afl consequential oro\"\"\"$,nn. pursuant lhereto lA NO: 1 OF 2024 I E Petition underl$ection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated Il in the affidavit filed irlsupport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further procGedings, including any recovery. pursuant to the order il I fl. , passed by the 1't R :,i; d1.O2.O3.2024 with Dl espondent uls. 147 r.w.s. '144 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, N No ITBA/ASrlsl14712023-2411061879711(1) for the ,; Ay 2019-20 fri IrCounsel for the PetitiSner: SRI A. V. RAGHU RAM .; t.r ' , Counsel for the Respbndents: M/s.SUNDARI R PISUPATI , (Sr SC for Income Tax DePt) ir The Court made the fdllowing: ORDER ii' i l1 (,! ffi ri i fl ,il ,l I I ;l dl tlt ,ii . ]l ,/ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.6242 OF 2024 ORDER:@erHon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Raghu Rarn, learned counsel for the peLitioner, Ms.Sundari R Pasupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondentl.. Perused the material avajlable on record. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been hled bv the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: \"to poss on order or direction especiolly one in the noture of WRIT OF MANDAMUS holding thdt the order possed by 1st Respondent u/s 147 r w s 744 r w s 1448 of the Act dt 02 03 2024 with DtN No ITBA/AST/S/147/202324/10618797171 for the Ay 2019-20 os orbitrory illeqol bod in low void ob initio oport lrom being violotive of provisions of section 148A ond section 149 of the Act ond olso contrdry to the circulor issued by CBDT ond provisions of section 751A of the Act ond consequently set oside the order possed by 1St Respondent u/s 147 r w s 744 r w s 1448 of the Act dt 02 03 2024 with DIN No ITBA/AST/S/147/2023 24/1061879771 l Jor the Ay 201.920 ond o conse q ue n tid I proce ed ing s p u rsuo nt the reto \" - 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised the present Writ Petition is that under the amended 1n i :3t€,':::i 2 PSK,J & ]VTR J W.P.No.6242 oJ 2O24 provisions of the Act which came into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 148,{ 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 by this very Bench in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.09.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, learned Stalding 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. PSI(,..I & ,l rrR,J W.P.No.6242 oJ 2O24 6. So far as this contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, 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 preliminory objection raised bg the petitroner is sustained and all these toit petitions stands allouted on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quastrcd on tLe point of jurisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed further and decide the otter issues raised bg the petitioner uhich stands reserued to be roised and contended irL art app ropiate p ro cee ding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashish Aganua supra, as a one-time measure exercising tlte powers under Article 142 of the Constihttion of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under tLe substituted prouisions, and thi\"s Court ollouing the petitions onlg on the procedural J1au, the right conferred on the Reuenue toould remain reserued to proceed further if tLey so want from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agaru.rul, supra.\" 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 a,llowed 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 PST,J & MTR,J W.P.No.6242 of 2O24 8. As has been held by this Bench in the a-foresaid 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. , To, ;il sD/- P. cH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ,$ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 'n t ^---- H llrRUE coPY// h- I sECrloN oFFlcER x It * 1. The Assessmerit Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Oeoartment. Ministrv of Finance, Room No. 4O1 ,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal NehrLr Siadium, Delhi - 1 10 003. 2. The lncome TaltlOfficer, Ward 1 . Adilabad. Adilabad :' The lncome Tax{Officer, Ward - '1 , Adilabad - 504'106. a. one CC to sRlilA v RAGHU RAM Advocate [OPUC] s. one cc to NI/sgsuNDARt R ptsuPATl (sr SC for lncome Tax llept) [uPUUl 6. Two CD Copiest fi H lvl lfl KKS |Ji I ,] rc-+- f V'A rn I ,t[ i: .t:.. e ,r $ :k, *! IJ ffi I ri H H 'l il it i{ IJ E :IT il 1 ill {l :tl I IORDER 1 :1 i, WP.No.6242 otr2024 I * $ ,x :.il ,dI $ ti l ,, ALLOWTNG T+E WRITPETITION ;;WITHOUT COSTS IHIGH COURT n .iti iTDATED:1110312024 k DFlj,-At c ( a t c) o 2 6 iur, i{t?{ * $ ,l t (fiv ir. ,i I "