Mr. Sreeram Reddy Muppidi V. Union of India

WP/35825/2021

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by the Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, challenging the legality and validity of an assessment order dated 20.09.2021 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi. The petitioner argued that the assessment order was arbitrary and violated principles of natural justice. The respondents included the Income Tax Department, represented by the Senior Standing Counsel. The court heard arguments from both sides and decided to dismiss the writ petition, suggesting the petitioner pursue the matter through the appropriate appellate authority.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 676426 (HC-INDIA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MUKHERJEE; K RAJI REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: CHANAKYA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 144; 270A; 144B

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE S ; ;. \", ii*il,iffi.,r{ :,:;^' \"^'^ 1 H u nffi ffi ll'tr,f il3 fl,t L$ifsf; ..,, u * THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI PRESENT WRIT PETITION NO :35825 0F 2021 Between: 1 ff :fliii,v,',g1}:';?tl1ng;;3;&I33:L,y'RB'5lt%:',:tr;;i: Occ. H ills, AND ...PEflIONER(S) 1. Union of lndia. Reo. by it Secletary Ministry of Finance. Shastry Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra prasad Roa6. t t\"* fjelr,i_ I io\"06i 2' The Additionar/Joinr/Deputy/Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax/ rncome Tax officer, Narionar racere!s Asieliirlii,iciiiiiiJ]b\"rni. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constituti6n of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased toto issue a writ order or direction, more particurarly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing Assessment order vide DIN No. lrBA/AST/st144t2021-221103573s867(1) dt.20.og.2021 , under section 144 Rlw Section 1448 of the lncome Tax Act and consequential show cause notices dt. 20,09.2021, 12.11.2021 and 14.11.2021 under Section 27OA of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and against settled provisions of law and consequenfly set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 Suspend the operation of the Assessment Order vide DIN No. lTBtuAST/S/14412021-221 1035735367(1) dt. 20.09.2021, under Section 144 Nw Section 1448 oI the lncome Tax Act and the consequential show cause notices dt. 20.09.2021 , 12.11.2O21 and 14.11 .2021 under Section 270A of the lncome Tax Act' 1961 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of main Writ Petition' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CHANAKYA (M/s' CHANDRASEN LAW OFFICES) Counsel for the Respondent No\"l: SRI MUKHERJEE APPRARING FOR ASSGI Counsel for the Respondent No'2: SRI K' RAJt REDDY' SC FOR INCOME TAX The Gourt made the following: ORDER t HONOURABLE SRIJU.STICE UJJAL BHUYAN HONOURABLE SMTJUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Order. 6ro U*,t t, Si Juiice (Jldl Bt uyt) Heard Mr. Chanakya, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Mukherjee, lcarned counsel appearlng on behalt of learned Assistant Soricitor ( ler-rcral of India frrr rcsp.ndert No.1/u.ion of *dia and Mr' K'Raji l{ercrv, learncd Scni.r Standing Counscr for trrc income'Iax I)cpartmen t fcrr responder_rt No.2. 2. In this Writ petition, pctitroner l.ras challenged the legaliry and vaiidity of the Assessment Order datefl 20.09.2021 passed by respondent No.2/Naaonal Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi, under Section 144 r/w Section 144-8 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'tlre Act) for the assessm entyear 2019_20. 3' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the assessmeot order was passed without any application of mind and in an arbitrary I I manltcr. 4. .. ltcr l-rcarir-rg lcarne d counscl lor thc partics and on duc consideration, we arc oF thc vierv that petitioner should ar.al thc alternaur.c remedy of appcal bchrrc thc (}rmmissioner of lncome Tax (r ppeals) under Sectior.r 2,1(;r of thc , ct 5. In view ofabovc, petitioner is relegated to the lorum ofappeal as above. / 6. Consequently' Writ Petition is dismissed application is also dismissed' lleiated inteiim 1 . No costs' //TRUE COPY// SD/.K'ONESIM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR sEcTloN aEi\"=* To, NPJ 1. One CC to M/s\" CHANDRASEN LAW OFFICES [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO (ASSGI) Advocate [OPUC] 3. one CC to SRI K. RAJI REDDY, SC FOR INCOME TAX toPUCl 4. Two CD Copies. 5. One spare coPY. t Y HIGH COURT DATED:3011212021 ORDER WP.No.35825 of 2021 rlb i, l-tiA 31 Jlil 2022 ,1 ,./ DISMISSTNG THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. G)., * 4' 'rS\"* "