Mokara Ramaharsimha Siva Kumar Vs the Union of India

MOKARA RAMAHARSIMHA SIVA KUMAR, S/O KANNAYYA, AGED 50 YEARS, OCC SERVICE, R/O FLAT NO. A 2 MANITEJA TOWERS, BALASUMDRAM BESIDE ACB OFFICE, ADVOCATE COLONY, HANMAKONDA.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, NEW DELHI.

¶14

PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE, VIJAYANAGARAM DISTRICT.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

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 topleased to pass an order or direction or writ in the

¶18

2

¶19

nature of Mandamus duly declaring the impugned notices vide DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/105106287 8(1) and ITBA/AST/F/148a/2022-23/1051060978(1) dated 21.03.2023, issued by the 3rd respondent dated as illegal arbitrary and against the statutory norms prescribed under the Income Tax as well as the notification vide No. 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL (Part 1) dated 29.03.2022, and consequently Quash the impugned notice and order DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051062878(1) and ITBA/AST/F/148a/202223/1051060978(1) dated 21.03.2023, issued by the 3rd respondent, in the interest of justice and to pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

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 pleased to stay all further proceedings vide DIN & Notice No; ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022- 23/1051062878(1) & ITBA/AST/F/148a/202223/1051060978(1) dated 21.03.2023, issued by the 3rd respondent in the interest of justice and to pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.P RAMA SHARANA SHARMA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

¶26

3

¶27

The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar)

¶28

The petitioner herein had approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition, challenging the impugned notice and order vide DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051062878(1), issued under Section 148 the Income Tax Act, 1961 and ITBA/AST/F/148a/202223/1051060978(1), issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 21.03.2023, respectively, on the ground that the said notice and order could not have been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the same is impermissible, in view of Section 151 A of the Income Tax Act r/w the scheme formulated, by way of a Notification No.18/2022 in F.No.370142/16/2022-TPL (part I), dated 29.03.2022 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

¶29

This issue has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Prameela Pasumarthi vs. CIT¹ . The Division Bench, after considering the said issues, had, by its Judgment, dated 28.10.2025, had set aside the orders on the ground that the same are contrary to Section 151 A of the Income Tax Act.

¶30

Following the said order, this Writ Petition is allowed, in terms of the Judgment passed in Prameela Pasumarthi (supra), setting aside the impugned notice and order, dated 21.03.2023. It is needless to say that, it

¶31

1 2025 SCC OnLine AP 4052

¶32

4

¶33

would be open to the appropriate authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961, to take up necessary proceedings for the assessment in accordance with law.

¶34

As the writ petition is being disposed of on the ground of violation of Section 151 A of the Income Tax Act, all the issues raised in the writ petition are left open.

¶35

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

¶37

closed.

¶38

_______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶39

¶40

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

¶41