Sri A.V. Raghu Ram, Advocate V. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre- Income Tax and Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Adilabad

WP/25204/2024

AI Insights

The case involved a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act by the second respondent. The petitioner argued that the notice was without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, and violated several provisions of the Act and related circulars. The High Court examined the procedural validity of the notice and the subsequent orders, referencing a previous common order in similar cases. The court concluded that the initial proceedings were flawed, leading to the quashing of the notice and all consequential orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 816080 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal vs. State
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 148 of the Act, Section 1484 of the Act, Section 149 of the Act, Section 151A of the Act, Section 147 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, Section 272A of the Act, Section 270A of the Act, Section 27 AAC(1) of the Act, Finance Act, 2021
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J SUNITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Arbitrary; Assessment; Illegal; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Mandamus; Penalty; Void; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 148; 272A; 149; 270A; 1448; 151A; 226; 1484; 27 AAC(1)

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE S . A r_HYDE[f;JIDoF TELANGA NA I Dpecrat Original Jurisdiction) \"' *frfl6\"+l55.XBTIB r,+,\".fl f \"..% lE u. * [ 3411 ] PRESENT THE HONOURI rHEHoNouRABLEsR,r:li'\"'flj^r^fi ::J-::::_ARRAo Sri Vilas Reddv B il\"fi :ta:tl#\"fl *?,\"?'&3,T;t8,1p3t$\".,tl? jrSg,,i\"o,l,l8f ,ffi X,., AND ..PETITIONER 1 . Assessment Unit. , +?il$**h}i#,u,*u11ug-;,;,,\"e:T'E\"i?:\"n*\"I?l ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass an order or direction, especiary one in the nature of wRrr oF MANDAMUS hording that the notice dated 31ro3t2oz3issued by 2nd Respondent under section 148 of the Act with DIN and Notice No.TTBAJAST/./148 112022_ 2311051782171(1) as being without jurisdiction, arbitrary, iregar, bad in raw, void ab initio, apart from being viorative of provisions of section 1484 and section 149 of the Act and arso contrary to the circurar issued by GBDT and provisions of section '151A of the Act, and consequenfly set aside the notice under section 14g WRIT PETITtoNNo: 25204 OF 2024 Between: dated 31.03.2023 and the assessment and penalty orders passed Respondent for asst. year 2o1g-20 under section 147 r.w.s 1448, urs.272A 270A and 27 AAC(1) of the Act, respectively by 1\"' (1Xd), IA 2 NO:1 OF 024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances s the affidavit titeO in suppori of the petition' the High Court may be pleased the collection of tax and 0\"\"\"n' demands raised by 1't Respondent Ay.2019-20 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI' A' V' RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: Ms' J' SUNITHA (JUNIOR SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER tated in to stay for the I THE IIOIYOU ORDER: [per Hon,ble Justice Sujog paut) TIIE TIOIYO URABLE SRI JUSTICE RABLE SRI JUSTICE ATYD SUJOY PAUL IYAIIAVART{IrU RAJDSHWAR RAO T TITION No.25 F 2024 ground taken by the petitioner(s) is that in furtherance assessment process not taken Section 14g learned counsel for the Iearned Junior S1416;pg for the respondents. Iearned counsel for the of Finance Act, 2021, re_ Heard Sri A.V.Raghu Ram, petitioner(s) and Ms. J. counset r.. rr\"\";. ;;;.r:,'::, 2. The of the Income Tax Act, ludicial scrutiny. Since notice is consequential orders are also bad in law. 3' During the course of hearing, learned counser for the parties agreed that curtajns on this issue are Iinally drawn by this Court in a batch of writ petitions, W.p.No.2S 9O3 of 2022 and other connected matters, decided by common order dated 14.09.2023. The parties agreed that this matter mav be disposed of in terms of the Common Order dated, 14.09.2023 stood modified but the respondents have care of it and therefore, notice issued under 1961 calnot sustain bad in law, the 7 v.o9.2023 1n 4. This Court in the said order dated W.P.No'259O3 of 2022 ' heid as under: '3s rd vies '*' :'-:*:i,:'1l',i\"ll\"' ;lJi\"\":#\":- ctear tlat tUt nrot\"d'\"'1\"-i\"til\"J\"tt Ot\"\"O for reassessEent Departnedt uPon tr*llj^*-\"\"- r\"o.\"quent Ptoceedings sras u.iog ,ad.. sectloa 14aA' '\",^*--\"\"- \"\"u* the substituted -\"-a*o\"t\"**\"'\"\"i:\",'\":\":.f ;;;;^\"\"\":':l:.i\": provisions as laid il --^ -^nstrai'ed to Eorq . abse,ce of which' se \"ri. ,\".n.\"o.\"\"r\"partBe!t is i! ' Procedure a'topted- Dve;\" '';' ;;' Finance Act' 2021' at the coEtravetrtioE to the s!o' .:',^'-,-^ in direct cootraveotioo to [\"iI'*\"]\"lJ\"l':;'; ;;;\"'\" supre,e court i! the case of AshGh Agarsal' sul'la' 36 r.or au the \"'\"t;\"\"'u ttt*\"\"' the lEPugred notices lssued and tue proceeaifi-ut\"*\" o\" the respoudeaLDePartdent ls neither telable' i'- \"rr\"t\"rottt\"' The notices so issue'l ard the procedure tuo-J*u o\"tot per se illegal' dcserv^es to be and are accordingly s_e't aside/quashea' As a conseque[ce' all thc i'opugaed orders getting quashed' the cons€queotial orders passed by tlre respondent Departoeqt pursualt to the aotices issued uEdet sectioa 142 and 148 would also get queshed ald it is otdele'l accordiagly' The reason we are quashilg the co'rseque[tlalorderisoathePriaciplesthatwheBthe i[ltiatioa of the Proceedings ltself sas Procedurally wrong' the subscquent o'derc also gets uuulfied autodatically' 37. The preliainary objection raised by tte petitloner is sustalT e'l and aU these writ PetitloDs stands allowed on this very jurisdlctio[al issuG' Since the iEpug[ed notices aad oltlers are gettitrg quashed otr the point ofjurisdiction' we are not incli[ed to Procee'l rur]tter aud 'tecld€ tLe _tLc' i33u'6 raised by the petitioner which stantts reselved to be raised and colteaded ia an 'PProPriatc Proceediugs' 38. SiDce tlre Eoa'ble SuP'ede Court had' iT the cas€ of Ashish Agsrsal, supra' as a one-tiEe ocasure excrcisi[g the powers ulder Atttcle 142 of the corstitutio! of India' Permitted the Revenue to Proceed uader the substituted ptovisioas' afld this Court auowiag the petitions oEly oE the Procedurel flaw' the right coBferred on the Revcnue Yould remaln reserved to proceed further if they so waat froE the 3 stage of tne ordet of the SupreEe Couit ir the c.se of Ashish Agarval, supra. 39. No ord€r as to costs-, 5. In view of the consensus arrived, the impugned Show Cause notice and consequential orders passed in this writ petition are set aside. Liberty is reserved to both the parties to take respective stand and to proceed in accordance with law as per paragraph No.38 of the order dated 14.09.2023 in W.P.No.259O3 of 2022. 6. The Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. SD/- K.SREERAMA MURTHY //TRUE COPY// ,l . The Assessment Unit, National Faceless ASSeSSment Centre- lncome Tax ' D;;;;il;;]. rrrtinl.trv of Finance, Room No 401'2nd Floor, E-Ramp' Jawaharlal Nehru Sladium, Delhi -1 '10 003 2. ih;fi;o# fai onicet, ward I, Adilabad, Ward-l , Adilabad 5. f n\" income Tax Officer, Ward - '1 , Adilabad - 504106' a. On\" CC to SRl, A. V. RAGHU RAM' Advocate IQipCl 6 o;; cc io rrlt.. l. Sururrul iJur'rron st FoR it'tcotr'tE rAx) IoPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies BM GJP otp ASSTSTANT REGI$TRAR i i SECTION dFFICER To, I HIGH COURT DATED:1 210912024 ORDER WP.No.25204 ot 2024 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 Ht. S 14) k c a C .,, J (r ;, t 11 irIt ZtZr c/t? ultil 2-1, "