Smt. Chelikani Venkata Satya Lakshmi, Wo Late. Rajasekhar Chelikani V. The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Finance and The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle 3(2) and The Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2) and Tax Recovery Officer, Central Circle 3(2)

WP/8169/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Chelikani Venkata Satya Lakshmi, the wife of the late Rajasekhar Chelikani, who was a director of M/s. Venkata Sai Media Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (respondent No. 3), which held her liable for the outstanding tax dues of the company following her husband's death. The petitioner argued that the revisional authority (respondent No. 2) had not fixed a date for hearing her revision petition, which she claimed was illegal and arbitrary, violating her rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. The court heard arguments from both sides and decided to direct the revisional authority to expedite the hearing of the petitioner's case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 804162 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Constitution of India, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B MUKHERJEE; K CHOUDARY
• Assessee Lawyers: M REDDY
• Keywords: Coercive Steps; Income Tax Dues; Legal Heir Liability; Revision authority; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 143(3); 264; 226; 179(1)

Judgement Text

"[ 3311 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 8169 OF 2023 Between: Smt. Chelikani Venkata Satya Lakshmi, Wo Late. Rajasekhar Chelikani past Director of Mls Venkata Sai Media Pvt. Ltd,, R/o. H.NO.8-2-686l//10/A and B, Road No. 12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad- 500034. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - '1 1000'1 . 2. The Commissioner of lncome-tax, Central Circle 3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L. B. Stadium, Bhasheer Bagh, Hyderabad. 3. The Deputy Commissioner lncome Tax, Central Circle 3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L. B. Stadium, Bhasheer Bagh, Hyderabad. 4. Tax Recovery Officer, Central Circle 3(2), Aayakar Bhavan Opposite L. B. Stadium, Bhasheer Bagh, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS 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 a Writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No. 2 i.e., Revision Authority in not fixing the date of hearing and subsequently deciding the revision filed by writ petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of lndia,1950 and consequently direct the respondent No. 2 to fix the date for hearing and thereby pass an order in accordance with law besides directing the respondent No. 3 and 4 not to take any coercive steps to recover the dues from assets of the petitioner in consequences of proceedings through vide DIN and Order No. ITBtuCOM/F/'1 712022- 202311045780673 (1) d|. 21-09-2022. I ! I I lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 direct the Respondents No. 4 in not to take any coercive steps to recover the dues from the assets of the petitioner in Consequence of proceedings through vide DIN and Order No. ITBA/COM/F/I712022- 23110457806 73 ('1) dated 21. 09. 2022 pending the disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.GOVIND REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI B.MUKHERJEE FOR SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 TO 4: M/s. K.MAMATA CHOUDARY, SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPT The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.8169 of 2023 ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Uljal Bhuyan) Heard Mr. M.Govind Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B.Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, iearned Deputy Solicitor General of lndia for respondent No.1; and Ms. K.Mamata Choudary, le;rrned Senior Standing Counsei, Income 1'ax Department for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the wife of late Raj asekhar Chelikani, who was one of the Directors of M/s. Venkata Sai Media Pvt. Ltd., an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 196 1 (briefly relerred to hereinafter as the Act'). Following assessment proceedings under Section 1a3(3)/147 ol the Act of the company for the ,, assessment years 2OI2-13 to 2Ol8-19, a demand of Rs.280,70,3 1,572.OO has been raised against the compaly. - HC] & ,V?'R.-i W.P.No.8169 of 2023 3. In the meanlvhile, Rajasekhar Chelikani passed a a'all on 29.O8.2O2O. Demand notice was issued by respondent No.3 to the petitioner being the wife of late Rajasekhar Chelikani to pay the outstanding dues. Alleging that the same remained unpaid and invoking provisions of Section 179(1) of the Act, respondent No.3 passed the order dated 21.09.2022 holding the petitioner being the legal heir of Rajasekhar Chelikani 1iab1e for payment of outstanding tax dues of the company for the aforesaid assessment years. 4. Assailing the aloresaid order dated 21 .O9.2022, ' petitioner has preferred a revision before the 2.d respondent under Section 264 of the Act. Though the revision u'as received in the office of Lh,e 2\"a respondent on 1L.1O.2O22, no date of hearing has been fixed. 5. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition has been filed. / 6. Mr. M.Govind Reddy, learned counsel for the ) N petitioner submits that though the demand as against the HCl & NTRJ W.P.No.8169 of 2023 company has been fixed and raised, the same has not yet been determined qua the Directors including late Rajasekhar Cheiikani. In the absence oi fixation of the liability of the Directors including that of Rajasekhar Chelikani, no demand can be fastened upon the legal heir of one of the deceased Directors. 7. On the other hand, learned Senior Standing Counsel submits that since a revision has been filed, the revisional authority may be directed to dispose of the revision petition within a time bound manner. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we direct respondent No.2 to take on board the revision petition liled by the petitioner before him and received on 11 .1O.2O22 and thereafter decide the same one way or the other within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the revision petition filed under Section 264 of the Act as alluded to herein above is decided by the 2\"d respondent, no coercive steps I ) ) shall be taken against the petitioner. I i I I I - HCJ & NTR,J W.P.No.a169 of 2023 9. This disposes of the Writ petition. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 10. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. 4 //TRUE COPY// SD/.N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTAryT, REGISTRAR (I) SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Commissioner of lncome- tax, Central Circle 3(2), Aayakar Bhavan , Opposite L. B. Stadium, Bhasheer Bagh, Hyderabad. 2. One CC to SRI M.GOVIND REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 3 One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF rNDrA [OPUC] 4 One CC to M/S K.MAMATA CHOUDARY, SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPT loPUCl 5. Two CD Copies I'SK. SW I HIGH COURT DATED:2710312023 ORDER WP.No.8169 of 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. :.. o () ,+ '1 .'lri^ UE ST4 ( 15 l,lAY 2[8 * v? ! "