Tettangi Primary Agri Coop Society Vs the Principal Commissioner of Income TAX-1

¶1

N

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 11254 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Tettangi Primary Agri Coop Society, Thettangi Village Thettangi Post, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram - 535 217, Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Bellana Ramunaidu, S/o Mr. Bellana Satyam Narayana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens, Visakhapatnam - 530 020, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Income Tax Officer - Ward 1, Vijayanagaram, Income Tax Office, Koppu Guarana Building, Siddartha Nagar Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh - 535 002.

¶13

Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003

¶14

The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) / the Commissioner^ofIncomeTax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Through the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (NaFAC) Delhi, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001

¶15

The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad I T Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the m may jf^^tances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^theHighCourt be pl^^^ to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction, declaring the order passed by the 1st Respondent:, vide DIN And Letter No ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1066384703(1), dated 03.07.2024 in directing the Petitioner to pay 15percent of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appeal of the Petitioner before the 1st Appellate Authority, i.e., the 4th Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20, as arbitrary, illegal, barred by limitation, bad in law, void-abinitio, violative of the principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of Articles 14,19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and Sec 148A of the Income Tax Act. 1961, and to consequently set aside the same in the interests of Justice. lA NO: 1 OF ?()9R

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 1st Respondent, vide DIN & Letter No.: ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1066384703(1 ),dated 03.07.2024 in directing the Petitioners pay 15% of the disputed demand pending disposal of the appeal of the Petitioner before the 1st Appeilate Authority, i.e., the 4th Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA

¶20

I MAj

¶21

KRISHNA BODAPATI koushik karavadi (SR sc FOR INCOME

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶24

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶25

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND

¶28

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 11254 OF 2025

¶30

Between:

¶31

M/s. Tettangi Primary Agri Coop Society, Thettangi Village Thettangi Post, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram - 535 217, Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Bellana Ramunaidu, S/o Mr. Bellana Satyam Narayana.

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

AND

¶34

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens, Visakhapatnam - 530 020, Andhra Pradesh.

¶35

The Income Tax Officer - Ward 1, Vijayanagaram, Income Tax Office, Koppu Guarana Building, Siddartha Nagar Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh - 535 002.

¶36

Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No. 401,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110 003

¶37

The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) / the Commissioner^ofIncomeTax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Through the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (NaFAC) Delhi, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001

¶38

The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad I T Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana

¶39

...RESPONDENTS

¶40

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction, declaring the order passed by the 1st Respondent:, vide DIN And Letter No ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1066384703(1) dated 03.07.2024 in directing the Petitioner to pay ISpercent of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appeal of the Petitioner before the 1st Appellate Authority, i.e., the 4th Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20, as arbitrary, illegal, barred by limitation,^bad in law, void-abinitio, violative of the principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of Articles 14,19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and Sec 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and to consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice.

¶41

lA NO: 1 OF

¶42

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 stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order passed by the 1st Respondent, vide DIN & Letter No.: ITBA/COM/F/1 7/2024-25/1066384703(1),dated 03.07.2024 in directing the Petitioners pay 15% of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appeal of the Petitioner before the 1st Appellate Authority, i.e., the 4th Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2019 - 20, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶43

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA

¶44

R®®P°"'*ents: SRI VAIMSI KRISHNA BODAPATI REPRESENTING SRI ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI (SR SC FOR INCOME

¶45

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶46

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶47

[3526]

¶48

U A

¶49

MONDAY, THE FIFTY DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶50

PRESENT

¶51

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶52

AND

¶53

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶54

WRIT PETITION No.11254 of 2025

¶55

Between:

¶56

1.M/S Tettangi Primary Agri Coop Society, Thettangi Village, Thettangi Post, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram - 535 217,^Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Mr.Bellana Ramunaidu, S/o.Mr.Bellana Satyam Narayana ...Petitioner

¶57

AND

¶58

I.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam,² nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens, Visakhapatnam^-530020 Andhra Pradesh, and others.

¶59

...Respondents

¶60

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶61

1 .A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA

¶62

Counsel for the Respondents:

¶63

¶64

This Court delivered the following ORDER: {per NJS,J)

¶65

Heard Mr.A.V.A.Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner, who appeared through online. Also heard Mr.Vamsi Krishna Bodapati, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr.Anup Koushik Karavadi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.

¶66

The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶67

Order or Direction, de'Lr^ing'lhe'^l'^drT bylhe^l^^ReT^ T') “ ™r..? ~ and Sec USA of the Income Tax Act. 1961, and to consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice.

¶68

The learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions with reference to various legal contentions raised in the writ affidavit, submits the circumstances under which the petitioner society could not file rts return of the tax in time. He submits that the order passed by the respondent No.1 directing the petitioner to pay 15% of the demanded amount, without considering the case of the petitioner, i , IS not sustainable, He states that due to financial constraints, even the instalments granted by the respondent No.1 were not paid. He also submits that in similar circumstances a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.12.2024 in Writ Petition No.27342 of 2024 was pleased to dispose of the same with a direction to the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal within a period of si SIX months and that during the pendency of the appeal, the Authorities shall not insist for the payment of the instalments granted towards the outstanding amount. The learned counsel submits that in fact against the demands raised by the Assessing Authorities several writ petitions were filed and while entertaining the said writ petitions, interim orders were granted.

¶69

Whereas, the learned Junior Standing Counsei for the respondent Department submits that it is not the case of the writ petitioner that it is not capable of paying the instalment amounts and further that having

¶70

3

¶71

availed the remedy of appeal, the writ petitioner is not justified in filing the writ petition. 5, Though the learned counsel for the petitioner raised several legal contentions and it is also not in dispute that several writ petitions challenging the demands raised by the Assessing Authorities were entertained, in the light of the orders passed in Writ Petition No.27342 of 2024. dated 31.12.2024 this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition on similar lines. 6. The respondent No.4-Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, Pending disposal of the appeal, no action to collect the outstanding tax demand/instalme nts shall be initiated and the liability of the petitioner, if any. shall be subject to the decision of the Appellate Authority, in the appeal on merits, The petitioner is at liberty to file additional material, if any. before the Appellate Authority and it is needless to state tfiat before passing orders as indicated above, the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing.

¶72