Simmanna Basivalasa Murthy V. Union of India and Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax, AC Guards, Hyderabad and Asst. Director of Income Tax, Investigation, Visakhapatnam and Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 Srikakulam and Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Narasannapeta

WP/5557/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Simmanna Basivalasa Murthy, the petitioner, challenging the notices issued by the Income Tax Department which led to the attachment of his bank account. The petitioner argued that the notices were issued without following the due process of law, specifically without a prior notice of demand as required under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents included various officials from the Income Tax Department and the Union of India. The court heard arguments from both sides and found that the procedural requirements were not met, leading to the setting aside of the notice and remanding the case for proper procedure to be followed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 802359 (HC-ANDHRA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: G SHOWRI; VIJAY KUMAR PUNNA
• Assessee Lawyers: D V RAO
• Keywords: Income Tax; Mandamus; Notice of Attachment; Violation of natural justice; Writ petition
• Section: 131(1A); 226(3)

Judgement Text

"i I 1 V* ;; AMARAVATI COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) 7 NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER thousand and twenty four IN THE HIGH MONDAY, THE TWO PRESENT SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR the HON’BLE AND .GOPALA KRISHNA RAO HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V pftITION MO- 5557 OF 2024 THE WRIT : Cultivation, R/0 Between; Simmanna Basivalasa Murthy, Age 54 Yrs, Occ Reddy, S/o. Krishna , Narasannapeta (M), Srikakulam (D) ...PETITIONER(S) AND of Income Tax for AC Guards, by Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax Towers 1 Union of India, Rep state ofAP and TS.IO*” Floor the Hyderabad - 500 004 DDlT/ADrT(lnv), 3(1) Tax, Investigation 2. Asst. Director of Income Visakhapatnam, AP Ward-1 Srikakulam, AP of India (IFSC SBIN0000753), 3. Income Tax Officer 4. Branch Manager Narasannapeta, , State Bank Srikakulam (D) ...RESPONDENTS of India is filed praying therewith, the High > more particularly the action of the din and No. Article 226 of the Constitution the affidavit filed Writ, Order or direction Petition under stated in that in the circumstances be pleased to issue a Court may in the it of Mandamus declaring nature of Writ - 2 to 4 in one Respondent lTBA/COM/F/17/2023- vide ■,2023 U/s 226(3) of ITBA/INV/S/131/2023- notices issuing 24/1058453769(1). dated 04.12. din and 2023 U/s 131(1 A) of Income No. No. 1961, dated 13.12. Act, Tax Act, 1961 Tax Income 24/1058706907(1) and attaching the bank account vide No 31990355182 of the petitioner wit^'Qut following the due process of law as Illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of natural justice, the Income Tax Act, 1961 and article 14, 21 of '\"boratitution of India Consequently, in view ofthe facts and computation, ‘ dated 15.02.2024, either set aside or direct the Respondent No. 1 to suspend the notices vide DIN and No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2023- 24/1058453769(1), dated 04.12.2023 U/s 226(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961, DIN and No. ITBA/INV/S/131/2023-24/1058706907(1), dated 13.12.2023 U/s 131(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the Respondent No. 2 and * ■ ■ .0- 3. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.4, not to impede the operation of the bank account vide No.31990355182 of the petitioner until further orders of this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. V. RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI G.ARUN SHOWRI(CENTRAL GOVT. COUSEL) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI VIJAY KUMAR PUNNA, SC FOR IT Counsel for the Respondent No.4:— The Court made the following; ORDER APHC010098352024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3473] MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5557/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER Simmanna Reddy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) Union of India and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.DR. D. V. RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.VIJAY KUMAR PUNNA 2.G.ARUN SHOWRI(CENTRAL GOVT. COUSEL) The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. NARENDAR AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO WRIT PETITION No.5557 of 2024 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Narendar) Heard Dr. D.V. Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Gude Ravi Teja, learned counsel representing Sri G. Arun Showri, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for respondent No.1: and Sri Vijay Kumar Punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. The short point that arises for consideration and canvassed by the petitioner in the present writ petition is whether the notice of attachment and invocation of the provisions of Section 226 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’), are sustainable without the same being preceded by a notice as provided under sub-section 3(i) of Section 226 of the Act? ) 3. Sri Vijay Kumar Punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax, would fairly submit that the impugned notice issued for attachment of the bank account of the petitioner was not preceded by any notice of demand. 2 4. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the instant writ petition can be disposed of by setting aside the impugned notice on the short point of being in violation of the statutory provisions and Jhe principles of natural justice, and remanding the matter back to the concerned authority for re-consideration in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in part. The impugned notice dated 04.12.2023 issued under Section 226(3) of the Act is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to respondent No.3 for re-consideration and disposal strictly in accordance with law. 6. As a sequel, pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. Sd/- K L PAVANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /VS-— / / //TRUE COPY// — ♦ t SECTION OFFICER To, The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax for the State of AP Floor, Income Tax Towers, AC Guards, 1. th and TS, Union of India, 10 Hyderabad - 500 004 The Asst. Director of Income Tax, Investigation, DDIT/ADrT(lnv), 3(1), Visakhapatnam, AP 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 Srikakulam, AP The Branch Manager, State Bank of India (IFSC SBIN0000753), Narasannapeta, Srikakulam (D) One CC to Sri Dr. D. V. Rao, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri G.Arun Showri(Central Govt. Counsel) [OPUC] One CC to Sri Vijay Kumar Punna, SC for IT[OPUC] Three CD Copies. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Ssb PRK HIGH COURT ssb DATED:09/09/2024 ORDER •e W X 0 7 JAN 2025 | ^ . Current Section \"CSPATCH^!^ WP.No.5557 of 2024 PARTLY ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS "