Sri Musku Sathish Reddy V. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance and The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Nirmal

WP/6918/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sri Musku Sathish Reddy, the petitioner, challenging the orders 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 orders were arbitrary, illegal, and violated the provisions of the Act as amended in 2021, which mandates faceless assessments and proper procedural safeguards. The Income Tax Department, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not dispute the procedural flaws but highlighted other objections not addressed in the previous batch of writ petitions. The court, referencing its earlier decision in a similar batch of cases, allowed the writ petition on the grounds of jurisdictional and procedural errors, reserving the rights of the Revenue to proceed from the stage of the Supreme Court's order in the case of Ashish Agarwal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 798714 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ashish Agarwal
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 147 of the Act, Section 144 of the Act, Section 144B of the Act, Section 148A of the Act, Section 149 of the Act, Section 151A of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUNDARI R PISUPATI
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdictional issue; Procedural Flaw; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 144; 149; 144B; 148A; 151A

Judgement Text

"[ 337e ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 6918 OF 2024 Between: Sri Musku Sathish Reddy, S/o. Sri Srinivas Reddy Musku, Occ. Business, aged about 43 years, 5-1 1-51l7H, Priyadarshini Nagar, Nirmal - 504106. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Assessnrent Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Depa(ment, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 1 10 003. The lncome Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Nirmal - 504101 . ..RESPONDENTS Petitron 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 direction, especially one in the nature of WRIT OF TUANDAI ,4US holding that the order passed by Respondent uls. 147 t.w.s. 144 r.w.s l44B of the Act, dt.27.O3.2023with DIN No. ITBA/ASTlsl14712022- 2311051390755(1) for the Ay.2015-16, 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 151A of the Act, and consequently set aside the order passed by 1st Respondent uls. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 1448 of the Act, dt.27 .O3.2023 with DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/14712022-231'1051390755(1) for the Ay.2O15-16 and all consequential proceedings pursuant thereto. 2 I I 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 preased to stay all further proceedings, incruding any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 1st Respondent uls. 141 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s .1448 of the Act, dt.27.03.2023 with Dl N No. ITBA/AST tS/ 1 47 I 2022-2311 05 j 390755( 1 ) for the Ay.201 5_1 6. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM counser ror the Responr\",,,,,t;f3l*T:\",f y:l;,;*, The Court made the following: ORDER ,4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSIIY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TI'XARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.69 ta oF 2024 ORDER:(per Hon'bLe Si Justice P.SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr.A.V.Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Sundari R. Pisupati, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department for respondents. Perused the material available on record' 2. The instant Writ Petition has been hled by the petitioner under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief: \"to poss on order or direction especiolly one in the noture of WRIT OF MANDAMUS holding thot the order possed by 7't Respondent u/s 147 r.w.s. 1.44 r.w.s. 7448 oJ the Act dt.27-0i.2023 with DIN No: trBA/ASf/S/147/2022-23/10s1390755(1) Ior the Av.2O15'76 os orbitrory, illegot, bdd in low, void ob initio, oport Irom beinq violotive of provisions of section 748A ond section 749 of the Act ond olso contrury to the circulor issued by CBOT ond provisions ol section 757A of the Act ond consequently set oside the order possed by 7\"1 Respondent u/s' 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 7448 of the Act dt.27.03.202j with DIN No: tTBA/A5T/S/747/2022-2j/705739075s(1) fot the Av.2o1s-76 and oll consequentiol proceedings pursuont thereto...\" 3. One of the contentions that the pelitioner has raised in the present Writ Petition is that under the amended 2 provisions of the Act which carne into effect from Ol.O4.2O2l, the respondents, while proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, were required to issue notice under Section 1484 and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As per the amended provision of law, the proceedings to be drawn are also in a faceless manner. 4. 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.259O3 of 2022 & batch, dated 14.O9.2023 wherein this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitions to the limited extent. 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Depa_rtment does not dispute that the said objection was decided in the aforesaid batch of Writ Petitions. However, he further contended that apart from the aJoresaid objection, there have been other various objections also which the petitioner has raised in the writ petition. 3 6. 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 the same at paragraph Nos.37 & 38 which are reproduced herein under: \"37. The preliminary objection raised bg tle petitioner is sustoined and all tlese wit petitions stands allouted on this uery juisdictional issue. Since the impugned notices ond orders are getting quo-shed on th.e point of jurisdiction, u)e ore not inclined to proceed further and -decide the otter issues raised bg the petitioner uhich stands reserued to be raised and contended in an ap p rop riate pr o ceeding s. \" \"38. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had, in the case of Ashtsh Agarutal, supro. as a one-time measure exercising the pouers under Article 142 of the Constituiion of India, permitted the Reuenue to proceed under the substituted prouisions, and this Court oltouing the petitions only on the procedural flaw, the right confened on the Reuenue would remain reserued ti proceed. further if they so uant from the stage of ttte orier of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarua suPra.\" ( ( 7. [n view of the same, we are inclined to allow the present writ petition also 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 with the amended provision but under the un-amended provision which is otherwise not sustainable' 4 To, 8. 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 batch of writ petitions. No order as to costs Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/I lt*- SECTION OFFICER 1. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, lncome Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Room No. 401 , 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi - 1 10 003. 2. The lncome Tax Officer. Ward - 1, Nirmal - 504101. 3. One CC to SRI A.V.RAGHU RAltrl, Advocate. [OPUC] 4. One CC to Ms.SUNDARI R PISUPATI (Sr SC for lncome Tax Dept). [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies. BSK KKS I I HIGH COURT DATED:1 810312024 ORDER WP.No.6918 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1f{i S }a ({ 1\"' a:, f, ;_1 :i :..,. ,-.' /; -1 ,'.' . .\", (() 0I rnv ztz+ t, @c\"1t\"i qe' % "