Smt. Sunkaraneni Deepika Rani V. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Department, Ministry of Finance and The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 14(1)

WP/3601/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Sunkaraneni Deepika Rani, the petitioner, challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Department under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner argued that the order was arbitrary, illegal, and violated several provisions of the Act, including sections 148A and 149, and the circular issued by the CBDT. The main contention was that the reopening of the assessment was not done in accordance with the amended provisions that came into effect on April 1, 2021, which require a notice under Section 148A and a faceless assessment process. The court referenced a previous judgment in WP.No.25903 of 2022 & batch, which had similar jurisdictional issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799466 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal case
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 147, 144, 144B, 148A, 149, 151A of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Procedural Law; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 144; 149; 144B; 148A; 151A; 226

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction) l /ONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No. 3601 OF 2024 Between: Smt. Sunkaraneni Deepika Rani, D/o- Late Sri S. Raghava Reddy, aged about 49 years, Plot No.1259, Road No.36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500033. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Department, IMinistry of Finance, Room No. 401 , Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 1 10 003. 2- The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 14(1), l-T. Towers, A.C. Guards, [/asabtank, Hyderabad - 500004. ...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 pass an order or c'lirection, especially one in the nature of WRIT OF IVIANDA[/US holding that the order passed by 1st Respondent uls.147 r.w.s 144. r.w.s144B of the Act, dt.27.O1 .2024 with DIN No,|TBA/AST/5114712023- 2411060169082(1) for the Ay.20'1 5-16, as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, void ab initio, apart from being violative of provisions of section 148A and section 149 of the Act and also contrary to the circular issued by CBDT and provisions of section 1 5'lA of the Act, and consequently set aside the same. Centre, lncome Tax 2no Floor, E-Ramp, lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 1st Respondent uls. 147 r.w.s 144. r.w.s 1448 of the Act, d1.27.O1 .2024 with DIN No.lTBA/AST/S l1 47 12023-24110601 69082(1 ) for the Ay.201 5-1 6, and pa ss Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. V. RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J. V- PRASAD, S.C. FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJT WRIT PETITION No.36O1 OF 2024 ORDER:(per Ho n'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 ol the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: *to poss an order or direction especiallg one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS holding thot the order possed bg 1st Respondent u/s 147 r tu s 144 r u-t s1448 of the Act dt. 27/01/2024 tuith DIN No. ITBA/ AST/ S/ 147/2023 24/ 10601690821 for the Ag 2O1516 as arbitrary il egal bad in laut uoid ab initio apart from being uiolcttiue of prouisions of section 148A and sectton 149 of the Act and also contrary to the ciranlar issued bg CBDT and prouisions of section 1 51A of the Act and consequentlg set aside the same\" . 2. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the arnended provisions of the Act which came 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 - 2 PSI(,J &, NTR,J W.P.No.36O7 o1' 2024 assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner_ 3. 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.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 4. On the other hald, 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. 5. 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 3 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.3601 of 2O24 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which a-re reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminory objection raised bg the petitrcner is sustained and all these uit petitions stands allou.ted on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices and orders are getting quashed on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed furllrcr and decide the other issues raised bg the petitioner u.thich stonds reserued to be raised ond contended in an app r opriate p ro cee ding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Couft had, in the case of Ashish Agarutal, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Coutl allouing the petitions onlg on the procedural Jlaw, the right confered on the Reuenue u.tould remain reserued to proceed further if they so utant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aganta| supra.\" 6. 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 objecticn of the petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in accorda-nce with the arnended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable 7 . As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is 4 PSK,J E. NTR,J W.P.No.3601 of 2024 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, shali stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/- V. HARI PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /'1 /' ,, v' SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment C-gntre, lncome Tax Department, t ,4inistry of Finance, Room No. 401 , 2\"\" Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 1 10 003. 2. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 14('1 ), l.T. Towers, A-C. Guards, Ivlasabtank, Hyderabad - 500004. 3. One CC to SRI A. V. RAGHU RAtvl, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI J. V. PRASAD, S.C. for INCOIVIE TAX [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies N,lP GJP HIGH COURT DATED:1 210212024 oR 1HE sTA 14. ( e ) c O 2 2 I'1AB 2024 , C) _b .t t)Egp41r;Hrro ORDER WP.No.3601 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS * /'- [*, burl h\"P ^.- "