Smt. Thohida Sultana, W/o. Abdul Saleem V. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Vijayawada and The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada Circle, Vijayawada and The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), C.R. Buildings, M.G. Road, Vijayawada

WP/24523/2004

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Thohida Sultana, the petitioner, who challenged the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II, Vijayawada, to initiate assessment proceedings for the year 2000-2001. The petitioner argued that the correct jurisdiction lies with the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II(1), Vijayawada. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, after hearing the arguments and considering the procedural history, including a previous direction to raise jurisdictional questions before the appellate authority, decided not to interfere at this stage and left the matter open for the appellate tribunal's consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2004] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797249 (HC-ANDHRA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2004
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 124 of the Income Tax Act, Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, Section 253 of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: P R PRASAD
• Keywords: Assessment proceedings; Income Tax Officer; Jurisdiction; Principles of natural justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 144; 124; 253

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 24523 of 2004 Between: Smt. Thohida Sultana, W/o. Abdul Saleem R/o. D.No. 44-1-25/4, Near Ramgopal Theatre, Gunadala, Vijayawada- 520 004. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Vijayawada. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada Circle, Vijayawada. 3. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), C.R. Buildings, M.G. Road, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring that the third respondent has no jurisdiction to initiate the assessment proceedings for the petitioner with respect to the year 2000-2001 in view of Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 124 and the Circular of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax in F.No.Jurs/2001- 2002, dated 14-09-2001 and (2) to further declare that the consequential orders passed by the second respondent dated 21-09-2003 and passed by the first respondent in Appeal No(s).0088/VJA/CITY(A)/VJA/03-04, dated 03-12-2004 are invalid inoperative, void, abinitio, without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.R.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: MR.J.V.PRASAD SC FOR INCOME TAX The Court made the following : O R D E R (Per Sri Justice M.H.S.Ansari) Heard learned counsel for respective parties. From the impugned order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), it would appear that pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.No.25490 of 2002, dated 28.10.2004, whereby this Court gave a direction to the petitioner to raise all questions regarding the jurisdiction of the assessing officer before the appellate authority, the appellate authority decided the matter in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. Aggrieved by the said decision of the appellate authority, instant writ petition is filed questioning the jurisdiction of the assessing officer. According to the petitioner-assessee, Income Tax Officer, Ward-II, Vijayawada has no jurisdiction to make assessments and that the jurisdiction over the petitioner vests with the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II(1), Vijayawada. The impugned order is a comprehensive order disposing of the appeal against the order under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II (1), Vijayawada, for the assessment years 2000-2001 and therein the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer has also been considered, as noticed supra, in pursuance of the directions of this Court dated 28.10.2004. Admittedly, an appeal lies against the impugned order before the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 253 of the Act. In such view of the matter, we are not inclined to consider the merits of the controversy, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise all such questions including that of jurisdiction before the appellate authority, if so advised. With the observations as above, writ petition accordingly stands disposed of, keeping all questions open. ------------------------------- JUSTICE M.H.S.ANSARI ------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO 30th December, 2004 PGS To 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Vijayawada. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada Circle, Vijayawada. 3. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), C.R. Buildings, M.G. Road, Vijayawada. 4. 2 CD copies. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 24523 of 2004 (Per Sri Justice M.H.S.Ansari) 30th December, 2004 "