Sri Kallem Anji Reddy V. The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and The Income Tax Officer, Ward '13(1)', Hyderabad and The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, AP & Telangana

WP/100/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sri Kallem Anji Reddy, the petitioner, challenging an assessment order issued by the Income Tax Department for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner argued that the order was passed under the un-amended provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was not sustainable post the amendment effective from April 1, 2021. The amended provisions require the issuance of a notice under Section 148A and a faceless assessment process, which was allegedly not followed. The court referenced a batch of similar writ petitions decided on September 14, 2023, where similar objections were sustained on jurisdictional grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 806040 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B SAPNA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: VENKATARAM MANTUR
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 148; 144B; 148A

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 100 OF 2024 Between: Sri. Kallem Anji Reddy, S/o: K. Hanumaltha Ee.dqy^, 4S..\" !9Je.9F,.9gg'.9gf Servant PAN.'AO|PA5198M FLAT NO 303 YASAVI APT KRNATHIHILL' VANASTHALIPURAM , HYDERABAD, Telangana, lndia T.S -500070. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless n.r\"dsr\"ni centie, 6e[ri, vin\"trv oi'rlnance, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-1 10003. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward '13(1), Opp: LB Stadium, Basheer Bagh' Hyderabad, Telangana- 500004. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome, AP Telang-nana, AP & Telanagaria, lT Towers Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500004. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 or Mandamus, declaring the impugned order dt.04-11.2023 passed uls 147 r.w.s 1448 of the Act vide DIN No. ITBA,/ASTlsl147l2o23-24l1057690355(1) passed by the -l.t Respondent for A.Y. 2016-17, pursuant to the order u/s 14BA (d) dated 27.o3.2O23 and notice issued u/s 148 d1.27.O3.2023,by the JAO instead of FAO, as void, illegal, and contrary to the Provisions of lncome-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice. 2 3 IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CpC pra the affidavit filed in support of the petition, all the further proceedings 1448 of the Act vide Dl 04.11 .2023 passed by the this writ petition. ying that in the circumstances stated in the High Court may be pleased to stay pursuant to the impugned order under section 147 r.w.s N No. |TBA/AST tst 1 4t t2023_24t 1 Osz6gO3SS(i ), dated 1't Respondent for A.y. 2016_11till the final disposal of Counsel for the petitioner: SRt VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR Counsel for the Respondents: MS. B. SAPNA REDDY (*: sc FoR tNcoME TAX) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSI{Y AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.1OO OF 2024 ORDER:/per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. M.Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. B. Sapna Reddy, learned junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire record 2. The instant Writ Petition has been hled challenging the Assessment Order passed by respondent No.1 under Sections 147 read with Section l44B of the lncome Tax Act, 196 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act\") dated 04.O1.2023 for the Assessment Year 2016-17 . 3. One of the contentions that the petitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended provisions of the Act which czune into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, 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 assessee. As per the amended provision q! Iaw, the 2 d proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. Whereas, it has been contended by the petitioner that in the instant case, reopening has been initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. In respect of the said objection that the petitioner had raised, he relied upon the recent batch of writ petitions decided by this very Bench on 14.09.2023 vide W.P.No.259O3 of 2022 and batch to the limited extent. 4 . l,earned counsel for the Department would not dispute of having decided the said objection in the aforesaid batch matters. However, learned counsel submits 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 leamed counsel for the respondent-Department is concerned, this Bench, while disposing of said batch of writ petitions, had taken note of the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: 3 \"37. The preliminary objection raised bg the petitioner is sustained and all these wit petitions stands alloued on this uery jurisdictional issue. Since tlw impugned notices and orders are getting qtashed on the point of juisdiction, u)e are not inclined to proceed furtLer and decide the other issues raised by the petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and antended in an app rop riate p ro ce eding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in tle cose of Ashish Agantual, supra, as a one-time measure exercising the pouters under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, pennitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court allou,ting the petitions only on tlrc procedural Jlau' tle ight confened on the Reuenue tuould remoin resen)ed to proceed further if they so Loant from the stage of the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agaru.tal, supra-\" 6. In vievt, of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition a-lso on similar terms. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands allowed on the objection of the petitioner that the proceedings have not been drawn in accordance u'ith the amended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable. As has been held by this Bench in the aforesaid batch matters, the rights of the parties would stand reserved as is envisaged at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 of the said order passed in the said batch of writ petitions. No order as to 4 costs Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if F any, shall stand closed. SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTI N OFFICER To, 1. The Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment.Centre, Delhi, tMinistry of Finance, noom f,lo. qOi,-iia Floor, E_ Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium; Delhi- j j 0003. 2. The lncome Tax Officer, LB stadium basheer bagh 3. lncome Tax, lT Towers Masab Tank 4. The lncome Tax Officer, Wap^ ] 3( 1 ), Opp, LB. Stadium, Basheer Bhag, Hyderabad,Telangana -500004. ' ' 5. The Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax, Ap and Telangana, lT - Towers Masab Tank, Hyderabad-500004. 6. One CC to Sri Venkatram Reddy^Mqnlu1, Advocate tOpUCl 7. One CC to Ms. B. Sapna Reddy(Sr. SC for tncome fixl 1O}UC1 8. Two CD Copies - IY' TJ GJP Yr( HIGH COURT DATED:0410112024 ORDER q -tEL /' tl o $> ,* 'k) u o 'J- .. t. .) A/ sllt * WP.No.100 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. a Ctf&a #E* ,-O "