Allowed

M/s.Ta Infra Projects Limited, v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income

Telangana HC14 Jul 2025WP/12873/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Batch of writ petitions challenging reassessment notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued by jurisdictional assessing officers in central-charge cases instead of through the faceless mechanism. The court held faceless issuance is mandatory even in central charges arising from searches and allowed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

All writ petitions allowed without costs; impugned Section 148 notices and related proceedings quashed as violative of the Finance Act 2021 amendments effective 01.04.2021.

M/s.Ta Infra Projects Limited, Vs The Deputy Commissioner of… — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13447 I

¶2

I I

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

IMONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI .IUSTilCDUANSING RAO NANDIKONDA

¶8

WRIT PETITtoN NOS: 26645 26654 26667 28497 26788 0F 2024 AND 12437 9561 14549 14664 14674 12873 0F 2025

¶9

W.P.NO:2664 5 oF 2024

¶10

Between

¶11

Kings Pride lnfra Proier:Ls^pvt Ltd, Rep. by Managrng Dteclor 12-270stct22i, 1sr Ftorir^{-Reti6o*iii;loi"Jrriri"'''frus",,} Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad,l etangana - 5000028 pAN nnCti5'sErnl"

¶12

AND

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

Deputy Commissioner of lncome_tax, Central Circle _ 3(3), Hyderabad, AayakarBhawan Ooo I e-stjatum,-'BaJ.Li ell.;t, Hyderabad _ 500004

¶15

2 Prrncrpte Commissiirner "r^{tr."r"_ir* tc;;ffiYy;"*bad,AayakarBhawan.}

¶16

8th Ftoor. BasheerBaoh r A. Stjdiu; h#j,-ri,vj"l)nad_500004

¶17

3 Union of India, throug"h *re Seiietar,, O&1?;#i;i Revenue, ri/inistrv of F i na nce. C ove r nmen"t or r nola,-r.ro rtilBL;Jk, Ni; b;th i- 1 1 000 1

¶18

, ...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Pelition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances started in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to rssue an appropriate writ order or directron more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Manclamus, decraring the notice u/s 14g dt.0gt0,t2o24 vide DIN No |TBA/AST/S/14 B_1/2024_2St106747Szilg(t) issued by the JA0(.tst respondent) instead of FAO for A.y. 2OZ1-22, as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of rncome-tax Act and contrary to the principres of Naturar Justice.

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice u/s 14g dl. oglogt2o24 vide DIN No lrBA/AST/s/148 1t2024-2sr106147s2sg(1) issued by the JAO(rst respondent) instead of FAO for A.y . 2021-22.

¶24

counsel for the Petitioner: SRr A.NARASTMHA SARMA, ADDL. solrcrroR oF INDIA/ M/S. RUTUJA PAWAR/ SRI DUNDU SASHANK MANMOHAN counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: sRr PRAVEEN KUMAR sENroR sc FOR INCOME TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRt CaOt PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLIC]TOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶25

W.P.NO: 26654 OF 2024

¶26

Between:

¶27

Kinqs Pride lnfra proiects pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Managing'"'Tv"s",.. Dtector 12-2?-Y^c-?31. - 1:\ Fro61^- flqti6o*tFlo.ln"oi, Mehd ipatnam, Hyoerabad, retangana _ 5000028 pAN AAGCK35BiR.

¶28

...PETITIONER

¶29

AND

¶30

'i. Deputy C_ommissioner of lncome{ax, Central Circle _ 3(3), Hyderabad

¶31

^^{AayakarBhawan, Opp.LB_Stadium,Aasneei e-augn, ftyairra6al _-S6doOa} 2 Principte Commissioner or rncome-ia-x (C"ntrrli, rivo.,ioio. [ayr[ris"rir*rn, ^^{BlhFloor, Basheer Bagh, L} _B^{sradi;;'R;;;, r{vo8,iiiJitoddo,o""''"""} 3 Union of rndia, through" the secretarv, oeprrti""nt ot Revenue, tVlinistry of Finance. Governmen-t of tnaia Nortti_Bld( Iri;; oerni_i r-oobl'

¶32

...RESPONDENTS

¶33

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, decraring the Notice u/s,'l48of the rncome-tax Act dated 09108/2024 for Ay 2022-23 vide DrN No. ITBtuASTtst148_1t2024 2511067475145(1) issued by the JAo('lst respondent) instead of FAo, as void, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of lncome{ax.Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justrce

¶34

¶35

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶36

Petition under Section 1S1 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice u/s.'r4g of the rncome-tax Act dated Ogl0B t2024 for A y 2022_23 vide DtN No |TBA/AST/ St14B_tt2O242511067475145(1) issued by the JAO (1st respondent) instead of FAO

¶37

counsel for the petitioner: sRl A.NARASTMHA SARMA, ADDL. solrcrroR oF INDIA/ M/S. RUTUJA PAWAR/ SRI DUNDU-SASHANi MANTVIOTIA'V counser for the Respondent Nos.1 & z: snLpilvl'Er* xurvran sENroR sc counset for the Respondenr No.3: sRr-GADrFeonl#?R1t lfli, ,r.

¶38

SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INbIA

¶39

W.P.NO:26 667 0F 2024

¶40

Between:

¶41

Mohammed Aleemuddin,^9-4_134166, Mawin lconlruna Colony, Tolichowki, Gotconda, Hyderabad , soooooa FA"r.i^'niVprjborzL

¶42

...PET|T|oNER AND

¶43

'1. PepuJy C^ommissioner of lncome{ax, Central Circle _ 3(3), Hyderabad Aaya k arBhawa n oop L B- Stidiril"B#;;'B"augn, Hyderabad _ 500004

¶44

2 Princrpre com missioner or r ncome-Lx-t"i"?rii Hyo"rrbad, AayakarBhawan, Bth Ftoor. BasheerB3gft, L s Sialiu; hi"ru,ii,vo"rroad_500004

¶45

3 Union of tndia, throug"h itE s""i"rrrv, oliri#3", of Revenue, Minisrrv of Finance Governmen"r ot rnala^{-r.rortilBT#i} lii& Dethi-110001

¶46

Petition under Articte 226 ot theConstirution of tndia J::j::':T: circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the narure of writ of tvrandamus, decraring the Notice u/s.14g of the rncome- tax Act dated 28082024 for Ay. 2021-22 vide DrN No. rrBtuASTist148_1t20242511068070651(1) issued by the JA0(15t respondent) instead of FAo, as void, illegar' and contrary to the provisions of Income-tax Act and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice.

{

IANO:1OF2 024

Petition under sectron 1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice u/s.14g of the rncome- tax Act dated 28.08.2024 for A y 2021-22 vide DtN No trBA/AST/S/i4 B 1t2OZ4_ 251106807065't(1) issued by the JA0(.tst respondent) instead of FAO.

¶51

COUNSEI fOr thE PEtitiONEr: SRI A.NARASIMHA SARMA, ADDL. SOLICITOR OF TNDIA/ M/s_ RUTUJA PAWAR/ SRt DUNDU SASHANK fUnNnlOXeX Counset for the Respondent Nos,1 & 2: SRt pinviefv KUMAR sENtoR Sc Counsel forthe Respondent No.3; .*,-o_ouE?X#?Rff ffi, ,r. SoLIcIToR GENERAL oF II.iDIA

¶52

W.P.NO:28497 0F 2024

¶53

Between:

¶54

GBR Freight Forwarders l^ul .!td. 4O2,4th Floor. j_1O_14, lechnooolis. tsegumpet, Hvderabad - s00016 n"p .-'uv it,'oir!"toi Sri drr" 6iil"ii# Ajay, S/o. Sri i R Bala Chandran

¶55

...PETIT|oNER AND

¶56

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle_3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad SOOOb?

¶57

...RESPONDENT

¶58

Petition under Articre 226 0f lhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass ah order or direction, especialry one in the nature of wRrr oF MANDAMUS hording that the order passed by Respondent u/s.148A(d) of the Act, dt.27.09.2023 with DtN and Letter No |TBA/COM/ F t 17 t2OZ3_24t1 05661661 1(1) and the notice dated 27 -og.2oz3 issued under section 148 of the Act with DrN and Letter No.lrBA/coMrFr17r2o23-z4r1os662og38(i) for the assessment year 201920, as being irregar, arbitrary and passed in gross vioratjon of principres of naturar justice without application of mind, and consequenfly set aside the same.

¶59

¶60

lA NO; 1 OF 2024

¶61

Petition under section .r 51 cpc praying rhat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in supporl of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operation of the notrce issued by the Respondent u/s.148 of the Act, d127 .09.2023 for the assessment year 2O1g_2O with DIN and Letter No.ITBAJCOMtFt1Zt2O23-2411056620938(1) and ail consequential proceedings thereto.

¶62

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM counser for the Respondent: SRr PRAVEEN xu-iaan sENroR sc . FOR INCOME TAX

¶63

W.P.NO:267 88 0F 2024

¶64

Between:

¶65

l//s. R D Sates. presenr Address. plot No. 1OlA, 731 . M. B. Road, prem Nagar, New Dethi.110044 p,"rio* nioi.r."'6'lOicz, Dev Naqar, Karot R'Stsl::5 Derhi 110005 Rep, ov iis iartnei si'iiiraansar, si6 Late sri

¶66

...PET|T|oNER AND

¶67

'1. Ihe princioal Commrssroner of lncome Tax (Central), Aayakar Bhavan, ^^{Basheerbagh,Hyderabad 50000;"'- 50000;"'-'|u^ \ve\ve}

¶68

^^{Basheerbagh,Hyderabad 50000;"'- 50000;"'-'|u^ \ve\ve}

¶69

z. tne Assrstant Commissioner of lncome Tax. Central Circle _ .l(4), Aayakar Bhavan. Basheerbash nvot,iuioJodob?' ".

¶70

...RESPONDENTS

¶71

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia 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 lhe nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS hording that lhe order passed by 2nd Respondent u/s..r4BA(d) of the Act' d1 06 05 2024 with DrN and Letter No. rrBfucoM/F/1 7t20242511064670245(1) and the notice dated 06.05.2024 issued under section 14g of the Act with DrN and Norrce No. rrBtuAST/Mr14B 1t2024-25t1064670455(1) for the assessment year 2O2O-21 , as being i egat, arOitrary and passed in gross violation of principres of naturar justice without apprication of mind. and consequen y set aside the same.

¶72

()

¶73

lA NO: 1 oF 2024

¶74

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 notice issued by the 2nd Respondent u/s_148 of the Act, dt 06 05 2024 for the assessment year 2o2o-2'r with DrN and Notice No. lTEtuAST/M/148 1t2024_25t1064670455(i) and ail consequential proceedings thereto.

¶75

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondent: SRI PRAVEEN XUfrAAn SENTOR SC

¶76

. FOR INCOME TAX

¶77

W.P.NO:12 437 oF 2025

¶78

Between:

¶79

Arene Life Sciences pvt ltU, having its Corporale offrce at 3_5g, Main Road, 3rT*"Bi,$:l'e^i?1x"ps l1'.'E',1'^{; H;v;;;$;;* ri i' n s} "^{n' s o z o a z ii Ji}

¶80

AND

¶81

...PETITIONER

¶82

Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department. Natronal Faceless Assessment centre Government oi lnoial j";#;;;iit'J;i,Mils Btock B, press Enctave,

¶83

^^{Saviki Nagar New Dethi - fi00ti2} z Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax, circre-g(1,1. Hyderabad siqnature I"#"Ji.ii'rffi :lf #ffi A?ll;opp-b"I;;;'l'i;'d;;;:S;iiiilUaliilliivrnrr

¶84

Frnance, Union of lndla, North Block New Rep b.y its Secretary, Department Delhi tibooT-^{- '} of Revenue, Ministrrv,r,>r., y of(,

¶85

...RESPONDENTS

¶86

Petition under Arlicre 226 0f the constitution ot rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavil filed therewrth, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or Direction more particurarry in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugnert notice dated 28_03_2025 having DIN and Notice No. rrBA/AST/S/148r2024-2st1or518826i(j) issued u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 by 2nd respondenr for Ay.2021-22 as being without jurisdiction, without authority of raw, arbitrary, iregar, unjust and vioratrve of Articres 14, i g (1) g and 265 of Constitution of India anci consequen y set asrde the same.

IANO:1O F 2025

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 pursuant to r'mpugned notice dated 28-03-2025 having DrN and Notice No. rrBA/AST/st148r2024-25t1075.r88261(1) issued u/s. 148 of the lncome Tax Act. 1961 by 2nd respond ent for A.y.2021_22.

¶92

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI MOHD MUKHAIRUDDIN counser for the Resoondent Nos.1 a z' rv,..'l.slruIina, senton sc FOR rrD counset for the Respondent No.3: SRt cADi ijiiv"ieru KUMAR. Deputv

¶93

. Solicitor General of lndia

¶94

W.P.NO: 9561 oF 2025

¶95

Between:

¶96

Occ. Business. plc Yli"#ti::':i"1ff nffi l,i,ftmT,,ua[.#"tttr-rsti#i,J soods5^-'-'6rru- [iJ53rro,B33r."ol1rr1;o;'"""'fil"ii'd - ...PET|T|oNER AND .

¶97

Ji:',?:',li*.3,.o##..i3?:,,'(,?'rncome^{tax' centrar circre - 1(1),} Aavakar

¶98

...RESPONDENT

¶99

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issued a direction, order or writ more particurarry one in the nature of wRlr oF cERTloilARl seeking to quash the impugned Notice in DIN and Notice No-ITBA/AST/St14B 1 t2)23_24t1063755282(1) tssued under section 148 of the Act dated 31 03.2024 and consequentiar notice in Din and Notice No. ,rBA/AST/F/142(1)r2oz4-2st1074887658(i) issued under section 142(1) ofthe Act dated 22 03 '2025 by the Respondent for Ay 2020-21 against the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and non_est.

¶100

lA NC: 1 oF 2025

¶101

Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to

¶102

\ ,

¶103

¶104

dispense with the production of the impugned the impugned Notice in DrN & Notice No:lrBA/AST/s/148 112023-24110637s5282(1) rssued under sectron 14g of rhe rncome Tax Act, 1961 (Act') dated 31.03.2024 and consequentiar notice in Din & Notice No. ITBA/ASTrFt142(1)r2024-2sr1or48g7658(1) issued under section 142(1) ot the Act dared 22.03.2025 by rhe Respondent for Ay 2020_21 pending disposal of the writ petition and thus render justice.

¶105

lA NO:2 oF 2025

¶106

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings, pursuant to the impugned the tmpugned Notice in DIN & Notice No:lrBtuAST/s/148-1/2023-24t10637ss282(1) issued under section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, r961 (Act) dated 3i o3.zo24 and consequentiar notice in Din & Notice No: rrBA/ASTiF1142(j)r2oz4-25t1074881658(1) issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 22-03.2025 by rhe Respondent for Ay zozo-21passed by the Respondent pending disp6sar of the writ petition and thus render justice.

¶107

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI K.GOVINDA RAO counsel for the Respondents: SRr PRAVEEN KUMAR sENroR sc

¶108

FOR INCOME TAX

¶109

W.P.NO:145 49 oF 2025

¶110

Between:

¶111

Sesha Reddv Sadda, S/o .S. Sundara Ramaiah Aged 12. Occ. Business RIo s sundara Ramaiah pro,.ro 7olp,i,'ii""?,"iLt B. Janardhana Hirs, Road No.0S, Gachibowti, K v nr"grieJov,'ieiaiiana' soooe

¶112

...PET|T!ONER

¶113

AND

¶114

Union of lndia. Ministry of Finance, lncome Tax Deparlmenl. New Delhi. 2 ^^Government The office of^of Commisiioner,^{lndia, New Detn,} tncome^{- -} i;; il;;,il""r.^{v^ vvHqrr'} Minrsrry of Finance, J. tncome Iax DeDartment, Office of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, .^{Centrat Circle - 1(1) Hyderabad}

¶115

4 tncome Tax Officer, Ci:ntral Circle _ .l (.1) HyderabaO 5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, centrai ijir.r" ' iiiir""''"

¶116

o. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Deparlment Central Crrcle 1 ( 1 )

¶117

...RESPONDENTS

¶118

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit fired therewrth, the High court may be pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the actions of Respondent Nos 4 to 6 in issuing Impugned Notice dated 29.OB 2024 bearing No. |TBA/AST/S/14 B_1l2}2i 22511068113391(1) under section 148 of the rncome Tax Act as being viorarive of E-assessment of lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022, notified vide Notification dated 29-03-2022 bearing s o No 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction and being violative of petitioners fundamentar rights enshrined under Articre 14 of the constitution of rndia and to consequenfly set aside rmpugned Notice and a, olher Orders and proceedings passed/initrated pursuant to lmpugned Notice.

¶119

lA NO:1 OF 2025

¶120

Petition under Section 151. CpC praying that rn the ctrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the lmpugnej Notice dated 29 08.2024 bearing No |TBA/AST/S/1 4 I _1 t2024_225t1 068 1 1 339 1 ( 1 ) under Seclion 148 of the lncome Tax Act and to suspend all Orders/Notices and proceedings passed/in itiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice pending disposal of the Writ petition

¶121

counsel for the petitioner: SRr K.S.S.K.v.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr counser for the Respono"r, n.ll,'r'#H'or I KUMAR, Deputy 'RAVEEN

¶122

counser for the Rbspondent Nos.2 ,o?:'ii*'l;fffE'Ji?,1tfi1, sENroR sc

¶123

FOR ITD

¶124

W.P.NO:146 640 F 2025

¶125

Between:

¶126

Sesha Reddv Sadda. S/o S S_undara Ramaiah, Aged 12. Occ_ Business, Ri/o S Sundara Ramaiah. ptot r.ro zoiZ af'Eilr"|.,'i.rliE];'an",onuna Hifls, Road No 05, Gachibowti, K.v. nangaredOy,'i"irii""r'li6bdS

¶127

...PETITIONER AND I

¶128

Unron of lndia. Ministrv of Finance, lncome fax Department, New Delhi. 2 The office of commis6ion"I: t.;;;; il; b"iirt" r -,i"r Mrnistry of Finance, Government of lndia, New Delhi.^{'-"'r .-vHu^rrur}

¶129

¶130

3 llco.mg Tax.Department, Offrce of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Uentrat Circte - 1(1) Hvderabad

¶131

lncome Tax Offlcer, Cenlral rlircle - I (1) Hvderabad

¶132

5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Circle - 1'(i)'

¶133

Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Departmeirt'Central Circle - i(.1)AAYKAR _el,gy^"1^{opposite L B Stadium,B'asherBagh,fiyleraUaa,} T;t;r;;";^{' '} 500004

¶134

R4 to RG Both are same address

¶135

...RESPONDENTS

¶136

. Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the afficravit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to grant an order, direclron or writ, more so in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in issuing rmpugned Notice dated 29.o8 2024 bearing No. rrBtuAST rsr 148 _1 r2o24-2sr io6}11 3392( j ) under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act as being violative of E-assessment of lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022 nolified vide Notification dated 29.o3.2022 bearing S o No. 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction and berng viorative of Petitioners fundamental rights enshrined under Article 14 of the constitution ot lndia and to consequenfly set asicre rmpugned Notice and a[ other orders and I proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice.

¶137

IANO:1OF2 02s

¶138

Petition under section 1 5 r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit fired in support cf the perition, the High court may be preased to suspend the lmpugned Notice dated 29 OB.2O24 bearing No. lrBtuAsT/si 148_1r2024-2s11068113392(1) under Section .l48 of the rncome Tax Act and to suspend aI orders/Notices and proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice pendrng disposal of the Writ petition. I

¶139

counsel for the Petitioner: SRr K.s.S.K.V.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr INDUKURU

¶140

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy

¶141

courrier ror the Respondent Nos.2 ,o?:'!i*tTf;ilEJio]{,llflX, sENroR sc

FOR ITD

w.P.NO 14674 0 F 2025

¶146

*^Between:

¶147

Sesha Reddv Sadda,. S/o Sundara Ramaiah , Aged 72, Occ: Business, R/o S Sundara Ramaiah,pd N;;;Eiir,"ii""5i,,'rt No.05, Gachibowti, x v nangi[odv],'iera"n"qaia sooor.e,-^{JanardhanaHitrs,} hoad

¶148

...PETIT|oNER

¶149

AND

¶150

1 Unron of India. ,,",-:,,g,91 Finance lnc_ome Tax Department New Delhi 2 The Office of Commislioner, tncomel"ib.il ^^{Coveinmeni,oiihji",New Dethi} rrtmenr, t4inistry of Finance, 3. lncome Tax Deoartlncome Tax Deoart

¶151

lncome Tax Deoartlncome Tax Deoart

¶152

,^{centrat circre -'r1rfr-[l[' office of the Assistantcommissioner of lncomeTax,} 4. lncome lax Officer Central Circle _ .l (1) Hyderabad 5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Grcte I ;,/;\r""' o Assessment Unit tncome Tax.Departmehi,C"ntrut Circle _ .l (i ) Aavkar Bhava n, opp. L B. sradium B;.[";;il;,' iivi="iroro, l_etansa na_560004

¶153

R4 to R6 are same address

¶154

¶155

...RESPONDENTS

¶156

Petition under Articre 226 df lhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the, affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so rn the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the actions of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in issuing rmpugned Notrce dated 01 01 2023 bearing No. ,rBA/AST/sl148-1t2023-24t1058394213(1). under section 14g of the rncome Tax Act as being viorative of ,E-assessment of lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022' nori'ed vide Notification dated 29.03 2022 bearing s o No 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction ,no o"ing ,iol,r" of Petitioner's fundamentar rights enshrined under Artrcre 14 of the constitution of lndia and to consequenry set aside rmpugned Notice and a, other orders and proceedings passed/in itiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice,

¶157

IA NO: 1 oF 2025

¶158

Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the lmpugned Notice dated Ol .12.2023 bearing i No. lTBA/AST/Si 14 8 1/2023-2411058394213(1) under section .148 of the tncome Tax Act and to suspend a, orders/Notices and proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice pending disposal of the Writ petition.

¶159

¶160

counsel for the Petitioner: SRr K.s.s.K.V.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr INDUKURU

¶161

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 To 6: sRr PRAVEEN KUMAR, sENroR sc FOR ITD

¶162

W.P.NO:1 2473 0F 202s

¶163

Between:

¶164

M/s.TA lnfra Proiecls Lim*ed, ?.Nq Z-l_Sq, Flat No.101, 1st Floor, Amrutha Business .Comptex. Ameerpet, _Hyderabad'SOO- OiO. n.p by its Manaoino Director Mr rvt [4 Rehman aqeo'ss ye;ri FnNr. nasblar 1bE^{, '-"-"-y...v}

¶165

...PETITIONER AND

¶166

I Jlr. Qgpqty^{Commrssioner-of tncome,} Tax, Circle_2(1), Hyderabad. 2 The chier commissroner or rncome iiiJn;;;i;i fffi,is-, A16Icuaros, -^{Masab Tank, HyderabadS00 004.} J. lhe Deputy Commissioner.of lncome Tax, Central Circle_1(3), Aayakar

¶167

,^{p,!gv^n. 7rhFtoor. Basheer6ash,nvouridrot'tidbbe} 4. r ne Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department National Faceless Assessment centre Ropm, ruo aot lzri-JF'i;;;:'Eii;;p Jawahartat Nehru. Stadium, Dethi i 10 0031

¶168

(4th Respondent is not necessary pafi)

¶169

...RESPONDENTS

¶170

Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue wrir of ,Vrandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or Direction decraring the action of the 3rd Respondent in passing the Assessment order, dated 21 .03-2025 under section 147 0I rhe rncome Tax Act, 1g61 , for the Assessment Year 2o2o-21 consequentry issuance of Notice under section 14g of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 by the 1st Respondent instead of Faceress Assessment by the 4th Respondent and consequentiar penarty proposed under section 270A and 271AAC (1) of lncome Tax Act, 1961 in the Assessment Order, dated 21 03 '2025 by the 3rd Respondent, as void, iilegar and contrary to the provisions of the rncome Tax Act, 1 961 , without jurisdiction and in vioration of principres of Naturar Justice and Rure of Law, against Articre 14, 1g(1)(g) of the constitution of lndia and consequenry ser aside the Assessment order, dared 21 .o3.2o25 passed by the 3rd Respondent and consequentiar penarty proposed under Section 270A

¶171

271AAC ('l) of lhe lncome Tax Act, .1961 by the 3rd Respondent in the _,^{AssessmentOrder,as null} and void

¶172

IANO:1O F 2025

¶173

Petition under Section '1 5'l cPC praying that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to grant Stay of a' further proceedings, in pursuance of the Assessment order, dated 21 03'2025 passed by the 3rd Respondent under section 147 0f the rncome Tax Act'^'1961 and consequentiar penarty proposed under section 270,-,271AAC(1) of the lncome Tax Act,^-1961 in the Assessment Order, daled 21 .03.2025, for the Assessment year 2O2O-21, pending disposal of the above Wrif petitio., as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.

¶174

COUNSEI f.r thE PEtitiONEr: SRI G.NARENDRA CHETTY FOR SRI S.K.JEELANI counser for the Respono"",r, #ltlsrNrrHA, sENroR sc FoR rrD The Court made the foltowing: COMMON ORDER

¶175

THE HON'BLE SRI^JUSTICEP.SAM KOSHY

¶176

AND

¶177

E NAR SING^{RAO NANDIKONDA} THE HON 'BLE^SRIJUSTIC

¶178

26667^{2849726788 of 2024} WRIT^P ETITIO^{N Nos.2664s26654} AND I24^{379s6lt454914664} 1 674 128^{73 of 2025}

¶179

COMMo^{N ORDIIR:(PcrtheHotlbl,e Sn .lusticeP.SomKosh)')}

¶180

These are^{batch of writ petitions involving the same tssue'}

¶181

fhcrclirre.^{ther are clubbed together and are being dccided by this} contmtltt^orcler

¶182

Ileartl Nlr^{A. Narasimha Sarma' learned Additionat Solicitor of} Inrlia. Ms.^{Ruttria l)awar. leamed counsel'along with Mr' Durldu} Sashank^{iVIartnlohart.leamed counselfor the petitionerin Writ Petition} Nos.26(r45,^{)6(t51,?'6667of 2024;Mr' A'V' RaghtrRarn'learned} counsel^{tirL the pctitioncr in Writ PetitionNos 28497 and 2(r7U8 ol-} 2024.^{Mr. Mohd. Mukhairuddin,leamed counsel for the petitiorrcr irr} Writ I'etition^{No l2437 ol 2025; Mr' Govinda Rao'leamedcounsel} Iirr tlr,-' 1'rctitiorrcr^{in Writ Petition No'9561of 2025'N4r' K'S S K V'} Raghlva^{Rccldr- leamed counsel'r'epresentingMs iVlltri lndtrkuru'} lcarnccl^{coutrsel lbl the petitioncrin Writ Petition Nos' 14549'I 4664} and l;l(r74 ol'^{2025 and Mr' G'NarendraChetty' lcamed cottnsel'}

¶183

Pagc 2 of 24

¶184

representing Mr. S.K. Jeelani Basha, leamed counsel for the petitioner tn Writ Petition No.12873 of 2025. Mr. praveen Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel lor the Income Tax Department lor the respondents in Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 2666j, 29497, 267gg ol 2024, 12437,9561, t4549, 14664 & 14674 ot 2025; and Ms. J.Sunitha, leamcd Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax l)epartment fbr rhe rcspondents in Writ petition Nos. 12773 & 12437 o1202 5

¶185

1-he primary challenge in all these writ petitions is to the notice undcr Section lzlS of rhe lncome Tax Act, l96l (tbr short^.the Act,) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (for short^.JAO,) in each of thc writ Jrctitions.^'the chailenge is firstly, the JAO not having jurisdiction to issuc the irnpugned notices and the notices ought to have been issued by rhe l.aceless Assessing Officer (for short ,FAO,) and, secondly, thc impLrgned notices being in contravention to the cxplanarion ro Scction t5lA ol'tl-re Act and also in violation ol the e- Assessmcnt .f'Inco,re Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 read rvith thc notificarion ol- thc central Board of Direct Taxes (for shorr, rhe '(IBDT') dated 29.03 2022.

¶186

Page .i of 24

¶187

The notices in this batch of writ petitions rvere in relation to cases assigned to "central charges".

¶188

The question lbr consideration in this batch of writ petitions is "rvhether- in cases assigned to "central charges" the notice issued under Section 148 of the Ar:t could have been issued by JAO or it ought to have been as per the amendment carried out w.e.f. 01.04.2021 in a taceless manner?"

¶189

So lar as, whether a notice under Section 148 of the Act on or afier 01.04.202 I has to be issued mandatorily by the FAO is not contended or disputed by either of the parties, as the said aspect stands decided in a large number of writ petitions by tl.ris Fligh Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindta Reddy vs. The Incomc Tax Officerl The said view was also lollowed by many other High Courts and the issr-re arising out of all the High Courts is seized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a large number of S.L.Ps. prefered by the Income I'ax Department

¶190

1 Writ Petition No.25903 of 2022 & Balch, decided oo 1-4.O9.2O)3

¶191

"-iL

¶192

Iraee^.1 of 24

¶193

All the lcarncd counsel lor the petitioners primarily relied upon the aloresaid^judgment of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) and which was subsequcntly also made applicable in the case of "intemational chargcs" by thc Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle l(1), Hyderabad and Othcrs2, whcrcin again the core question raised for adjudication was whetlrel the show-causc notices under Section 148 of the Act in rnatters relating to "international charges" would stand exempted or' excluded fionr the lhceless procedure and has to be quashed only on that ground

¶194

tl. Apart tionr the aloresaid judgment, the learned counsel lor the petitioners also rclicd rrpon the judgment of the Bombay High Coun dealing rvith sirnilar circurrstances in the case of Hexaware Technologies Limitcd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax anr.l Others^t . flo*eucr, in all these writ petitions, the counsel rcpresenting the Inconte Tax Department vehemently contended that

¶195

2Wrrt Petrtion No 13353 of 2024 & Barch, decided on 24.O-i.2024 t 1zoza1^{au trR430} {Bomi

¶196

Page 5 of 24

¶197

these cases since assigned to "central charges". thcre is slight difference on lacts and law so lar as the applicabilitl' of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) at the first instittrce, and Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola (supra) in the second instance, and they wanted to distinguish and contend that this batch of writ^petitions would be an exclusion or an exc'eption so far as thc proceedings to be drawn in a faceless manner is concemed.

¶198

Mr'. A. Narasimha Satma. Iearned Additional Solicitor Gcneral ollndia led the arguments on behallof the Incorrc^.l ar l)epartment in all these writ petitions.

¶199

It was the contention of the learned Additional Solicitor^(ieneral that in all the writ petitions br:forc this Couft whclc tlte cases^pertain to central charges has arisen fiom the search and scizLrrc procccdings initiated by the Income l-ax Depanment. It was also the contention that the proceedings initiated or arising out of a sertrch and scizure cannot be equated with the normal assessment l)r()ccedings drarvn under the statute. It was also thc contention that a lhcclcss^proceeding is to be adopted in casc ol'a normal regular assessmcnt^proceeding and

¶200

not where the proceedings^have been drawn subsetluent^{to search and}

¶201

Page 6 o12,1

¶202

scizure. It rvas also contended that unless the notices in these cases are r.rot issucd b,'.' the JAO, the Deparlment would find it extremelv dilllcult in adhering to the requirement of law under Section l53D of' the Act

¶203

l l. Reading through the provisions of Section l53D ol the Act, the leamcd Additional Solicitor GeneraI contended that in order to ensure compliancc as is required thcrein, it would become necessary lor the proceedings to be initiated althe first instance by the JAO and, it was tn this contcxt, that these notices have been issued and the same tlrerelore cannot be found fault with and the petitioners do not have any clairr and thc writ petitions are liable to be dismissed

¶204

lt was the funher contention of the leamed Additional Solicitor Ceneral that recently the Cu.iarat High Court in the case of Talati and Talati LLP vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incomc-tax{ held thal

¶205

noticc under Scction 148 of the Act in a laceless manner as per the schen.rc fiamed by notification dated 28.03.2022 cannor be applied to cases olscarch and scizure under Section 132 of the Act and, in such circunrstances, it would be the JAO who is required to rccord his

¶206

"120241 167 tar-ann com 371 (Gutarat)

¶207

Pagc 7 trf^1-1

¶208

satisfaction on the^{basisof the material collected during thc course of} the search.

¶209

Leamed^{Additional Solicitor General alsorelcrred to a recent} decision of the^{Delhi I{igh Court in the case olT.K'S' Builders(P')} Ltd. vs. Income-tax^{Officer5.wherein reiterating thc r ierv expressed} by the Gujarat^{High Court itr the case ol-Talati and TalatiLLP} (supra), the Delhi High Coun^{had disrnissedthc batch ol' writ} petltlons.

¶210

According to the^{learned AdditionaiSolicitor General for} evaluation of data,^{thereis a mandatory requirementof JAO and when} it is a case arising^out of^{search and sciz-ure.keeping in i'iewthe} provisions of Section l53D ol-the^{Act,the salest infi're ncc that can be} drawn is that there^{is a concurrent.iurisdiclion availablc on the JAOas} also the FAO and for^{evaluationof the data also thc servicesof JAO} would be required. It^{was also contended by the lcarned Additional} Solicitor General that the^{provisions ofthe t\ct have tobe} irnplernented keeping^{in considerationthc harmoniorts constluction}

¶211

s 2024 scc onLine Del 7508

¶212

Page 8 ol24

¶213

and tliat^{the provisions ol the statute has to be appliedby giving a}

¶214

benefi cial^{constructlon.}

¶215

It^{was contended by the learned Additional Soticitor General} that clause^{(i) of Sub-section(l) ol Seition l44B of the Actrequires} that the^{NationalFaceless AssessmentCentre shall assignthe se lected} cases for^{the purpose ol laceless assessmentthroughautotnated} allocation^{system. Ctause(i) of Sub-Section( I ) of Section l44B olthe} Act for ready^{reference is reproduced hereunder:}

¶216

" (i) ttte Nttt iont l'-rtceless^{AsscssmenlCentreshallassign the} case .telected Jbr^{lhe purposes offocelessassessmcnlunder this} seclion^lo a^{specific ($scssnrcnltrnil through utt uutonuted} alloctttion^sYstem.''

¶217

Lastly,^{it was contended by the leamedAdditional Solicitor} General^{that in casesof "centralcharges", thereis no requilement to} conduct^{proceedings underSectiotr l48A of the Act and hence the} notices issued^{under Section 148 of the Act in case ol "ccntral} charges"^{cannot be issued on automated allocation system'}

¶218

Flaving heard^{the learned counselfor the parlies' panicularly} the learned^{Additional Solicitor General extensively' it would be} necessaly at^{this juncture to take note of the decisionrendcredin the}

¶219

Page 9 ol24

¶220

case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy^{(supra) wherein the Division} Bench of this High Court in a batch of^{rvrit petitions,has held in} paragraph Nos.i5 to 38 as under:

¶221

"35. ln view of thc aJbrcsaid drsc u.r.s irt tts. il is b)' nttvr verv clear lhal the procedure to be follotted b); lhc^respondenl- Department upon treating thp nolices^isstted for^reo:Jessmenl being under Section I48.,1, the subsequent^{proceeding.tvas} mandalorily required to be underlaken uruler the sub.\tiluted provisions as laid dotutt under the Financc .,ltl. 20)l ln^tha absence of which, v,a dre conslroine(l to loltl^{r hut the} procedure adopted by lhe re-sltondent- Deparlmcnl isⁱⁿ controt)ention lo tie slolule te. lhe Finuncc.4c1. 20)1. ut^lhe rtr$^{inslonce. Secondly, il is olsoin direct conlravcntiotllo lhe} directives issued by the Ilon'ble^{,Suprcnte('ourl} in^thccoseoJ' .4s his h Agarwal, supra.

¶222

For all the oforesaid reu.sons, thc impugnttd^rutticcs i:;sued and the proceetlings drawn b1i llrc^rcsporulenl- Deparlmcnt is neilher lenuble. nor suslainahle Thc^rutlicc.ssrt issued and thc procedure adoptcd being per sc illcgol.^de.serves lo be and are accorclingly set oside/quushctl

¶223

-he preliminarlt ohiection^rai.sed b.l^{lhe pelitrttneris} suslained and all tha.ve v,rtt^{pelilio s sttuuls ullowulon lhis} very lurtsdictional issue. Since the impugned noticc.r^urul orders are getling quoshe.l on^{lhe poinl of jurisdictittn.we orc} not mclned lo proceed .further and decide the olltr^issues raised b, lhe petilioner which staruls rcservecl to^{he raised and} conlended in an appropriate proceeding,s

¶224

Page l0 of24

¶225

Since the llon'ble Supremc Courr hatl, in fhe case ol Ashish Agarwal (l supra) as o one-line meo-\ure exarci-sing lhc pou,ars under Article 142 of the Constitution of lntlia. pernzilted the Revenue to proceed under the substiluted prot'ision.s, untl this Courl aLlotting lhe. petitions only on the ltrotedural fla+r, the right conferred on tlu Revenuc u,ottltl renain re.seryed lo proceed {urther if they s() reant -from the slage o1'lhe order oJ the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi_;h Agorw (l supra). "

¶226

From the aforesaid judgrnenr and the principles ol which have been r-eiterated in a large number of writ petitions subsequenrly filed, it would be evidently clear that the view of this High Court and the ratio laid down was that on and after coming into force of the Finance 4ct,2021 w.e.f.01.04.202 l, and with the introduction of the arne'durent to Section r4g of the Act wherein it was envisaged that the assessments have to be done b,v way of an automated faceless mechanism, all proceedings of assessment drawn subsequently have to be by fbtlowing the same mechanism. Further, the Hon,ble Suprcme C'ourt in the case of IJnion of India and Others vs. Ashish Aga rwa16, in very categorical terms has held as under:

¶227

"Thus, the ne*- provisions s.ubstitutetl by the Finunce Act, 202l being remedial and benevolent in noltffe ond sub.ttituled with a

¶228

2022 SCC OnLine SC 543

¶229

Page ! I ol'24

¶230

sl)cci/ic dim ond object to protect the rights and interest of lhe assessee as v,ell as and the same being in public inttrast, the raspective lligh Courts have rightly held thot the benc/ir ol nev, provi:'ions shall be made avoiluble cven in re:pt'tt of tlrc proceedings relaling lo past uss6smtnt ycdts. I)tot,ided saclion 118 notice has been issued on or afier April l. 2021 We are in complete agreemenl tith tht t,iet' tukt'n h) the various High Courts in holding so

¶231

Ilowever, al lhe some time, the judgmenls of Ihe seven ltigh Courls would result in no rea.tsessmenl proceedinq.\ Ltt oll even iithc same are perntissihle under the Finance Act. 2021 und us per substiluled sDctions 117

¶232

The Revenue cannot be ntade remediless and lhe ohftct und purpose ofreassessmenl proceedings conrutt be.frustrt rd. lt is true thol due to a bona fide mistake and in viey, oj sub-sequcnl exlension of time vide vorious nolifications. the Revenuc issucd the impugned nolices under section lJ8 after thc oncrulnrcnt t,us enlorced with effect from April l. 202 l. undar thc unamencled section 148. ln our viev' theSante ought not to have been issued under the unamended Act und ought to hayc haen issued under lht substiluled provisions ofsections lll n.t l5l of the Income-tat Act as per the Finance Act. 202 I Thert dppeors to be genuine non-applicoliotl ctf the anendntanl.s u: the of/icers of the Revenue mo] how heen under u httnt .fitlt beliaJ'that the amendments moy not yel hove been enfbrctd. 'l he re-fore, v'e are of the opinion that sonte leeu'a! mu.st ba shov,n in lhal regord whic'h the High Courts could hut'e done so Thcreforc, inslead o.,f quashing .tnd sellitlg usida tlt re sses.\menl nolices issue'd under lhe unomended provision.s

¶233

['agc l2 of 24

¶234

of the Income-tar .,lct as those deemed to hate 6""n 1rrrr", under section laSA of the [ncome-tar Act as per lhe nctt, provi5ion5 ty' section I48A and the Revenue oughl to huve been permitled to proceed .further with the reassessnent proceedings as per the subsliluted provisions of sections 147 to l5l of the lncome-tax Act us per the. Finunce .4cr, 2021. subject to complionce o/ all the procedurol requirements and lhe defences, n'hich may be auailable to lhe assessee untler the .sub.slituted provision.s oJ'sections t 47 to I 5 I of the lncotne_tax Act trnd u,hich ntay be uvailable under lhe l|nance Au. 2021 and in lav,. There.fttre, we propose to modifv the irulgment..s and orders passed by the respective High Courls o., tmder:

¶235

(, Thc respective impugned section l18 notices issuetl to the respective ,s.re.ssee-r shalt be deemed to have heen issued under section 148,4 of lhe lncone-tar Act us substituted b),the Finance Act, 202t und rrcatctl tLt hc shov,-cause notices in terms of sectiotl 14g,4(U Thc respective Assessing O.fficers shall u,ilhin thirtl, tlays

¶236

Jrom^todoyproyide to the asseessees the infrtrntatiort and malcrial rtlied uptn by the.Revenue so lhat tllc (Ltscessees can reply to the notices wilhin h+,o y)eek, the r eafter;

¶237

(i, T'he requirement oJ conducting dny (.nquir! ujith th?

¶238

prior approval of the specified outhority under section 148A9(a) be dispen-red with as a onetime mea.sure vis_tt vis lhose nolices which haye been issuetl untlar .tecliorr 118 of the unumended Acl from April t.

¶239

(iii) The Assessing Of/icers shall therea.fier pass nn order in lernlt oJ scction 148A(d) ofter .[ollot,ing the duc

¶240

Page li ol24

¶241

l)toLcdure^{as requiretlunderseclionl48A(b) in respect} oJ cach of the concerned^{ossessees" . '}

¶242

Following the^aforesaid iudgment^{ofthe I-lon'ble Suprcme}

¶243

Court in Ashish^{Agarwal (supra),it hasbeen emphaticallyheld by the}

¶244

Division Bench of^{this High (lour1 in the case ol RavindraReddy}

¶245

(supra) that there is no furlher^{disputeto be adjudicated so t-al as what} is the mechanism^{which has to be appliedfor assessment lre-} assessnlenl er,eu il it is^{fbr assessmentof previous years if the} proceedings have been^{initiatedon or after01.04.202l' It has to be} only through automated^{t-acelessmechanismand no otherway'}

¶246

19.1. Hence, the^{questionof lawas framed in the earlierparagrapl-rof} this order is^{"u,hetherin the case oI centralcharges, could the} afbrementioned^{principles of law be deviatedand whetherthe} proceedings drawn uncler^{the central chargescouldbe b;' the JAOor it} too has to be in a taceless^uanner?"

¶247

l-he CBDT in^{respect of the same had issuecl a notiilcation} dated 29.03.2022^{in exerciseof its powers under Sttb-Section( l) and} (2) of Section I -5 I A of the Act and,^{framed a scheme'which fbr ready}

¶248

referencc is reploduced^hereunder:

¶249

¶250

Page )4 ol 24

¶251

MINISTRY OF [INANCE (Departmcnt of Revcnuc)

¶252

(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT ]'A>{ES)

¶253

NOTIFICATION

¶254

Neu, Delhi, the 29th March. 2022

¶255

S.O. 1466(E):- In exercise of rhe powers conl'erred by sub_ sections (l) and (2) ofsection l5lA of the Income-rax Acr, lg6l (4j ol 196l). the Central Govemment hereby makes rhe fbllowing Scheme, namely:-

¶256

l. Short title and commencement:-- ( I ) This Scherrc rna1,. bc called the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme. ?.02).

¶257

(2) It shall come into force with effecl from rhe dare ol' its publication in the Official Gazette.

¶258

Definitions: - (i) In lhis Scheme, unless the conrext otheru.ise requircs.

¶259

(a) "Act'' means rhe Income-ra.\ Acl, l96l (43 of l96l );

¶260

(b) "automated allocation" means an algorithn fbr randomised allocation of cases, by using suitable technological tools, inclucling artificial intelligence and machine learaing, with a vierv ro oprimis; the use of resources.

¶261

(2) Words and expressiolrs used herein and nor defined. but tleflned in the Act. shall have lhe meaning respectivelv assigued to them in the Act.

¶262

Scope of the Scheme:- For the purpose of this Scheme._ (a) assessment. reassessmeut or recomputation under section 147 of the Act.

¶263

(b) issuance of notice under section l4g of the Act, shall be through automated allocation, in accordance rvith risk management strategy formulated by the Board as relerred to in section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice, and in a faccless lnanner, to the extent provided in section l44B of the Act r.i,ith reference to making assessment or reassessment of total income or loss of assessee.

¶264

(Emphasis supplied)

¶265

Page l5 of 24

¶266

2l . Similarly, the CBDT earlier^{also vide order dated06.09.2021,in}

¶267

exercrse ol its powers under Section I l9^{of the Actintroducedcertain}

¶268

exceptions / exclusions to Section l44B of^{the Act. The said order}

¶269

dated 06.09.202 I. lor ready rel'erence^{is again reproduced hereunder}

¶270

Section l448(2) of the Income^'I'ax Act. 196l

¶271

I 448. Facclcss Assessment: (l)

¶272

(2) Thc faceless assessment under sub-section (l) shall be^made in respect ot'suclr territorial ar!-a- or^persons or^{class of persons.or} incomes ol elass trl'incontes- or cases or^class ol^{cases,as maybe} specified b1' the Board-

¶273

(Emphasis Supplicd)

¶274

csor,. o.a". dared 06.0g.202

¶275

t.No. I87ll/2020-ITA-I

¶276

(lovernment of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (Crntral lloard of Direct Taxes) ***++

¶277

North Block, Nerv Delhi Dated, the 6th September,202l.

¶278

ORDER

¶279

Subiect:Order under scction I 19 of the Income-tax^Act 196l^(the Act)^p rovidins exclusions^{to sectionl44B ofthe Act.}

¶280

-fhe F'aceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 (the Scheme) has been incorporateci in the Act vide the^{'faxationand OtherLaws} (Relaxation and Amendment ol Certain Provisions) .A.ct. 2020 Section 14{B of the Act pertaining to Iiacclcss^{Assessmenlhas} been inserted by^the said anrendment^{w.e.f. 0l .04.2021.}

¶281

2.^'fhe Cential Boirrd of I)irect Taxes vide Order^{F No.I87i3l2020-} ITA-I dat,.-d l3th August. 2020 (the Order)^{rcad withorderundcr}

¶282

Pagc l6 oI24

¶283

section Il9 of the ,qct regarding ntutatis mutandis application of Orders, Circulars etc., issued in order to implcment thc Schentc t<r Faceless Assessnrent u/s l44B of thc Act, i .t to. t g7l;l2OZt)-ltn_ t datcd i I sr Mar-ch. 202 I directed thar all thc Asscssment Orrlers shall be passed by the National l'acelss Assessment Centre Q.JaFAC)^u/s 1448 of the Act except as under:_ i. Assessment orders in cases assigned to Central Charges. ii. Assessment Orders ir.r cases assiglcd to International I.ax (-hargcs."

¶284

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶285

A plain reading ol rhe aforesaid order dated 06.09.202 I

¶286

conjointly with the rlotificarion dated 29.03.2022 ,"vould go ro show that the CBD'| has in fact carvcd out two exceptions so lhr as impler.enti,g the scheme of faceress assessment. 'r'hose two exceptions are (i) assessment orders in cases assigned to central charges; and (ii) assessment orders in cases assigned to intemational tar charges. So lar as the assessntent ol.ders in cases assigned to international tax charges, recelrtly the said exception was under challcnge in a batch of writ petitions before this High Courr in the case of Sri Venkataramana Retldy patloola (supra). White deciding thc said batch of writ petitions, the Hon'ble Division Bench hearing the said writ petitions took note of the order dared 06.09.202 l and notiflcation dated 29.03-2022 and in very categoricar rerms herd in paragraph Nos.23, 24,27 and 29 as under:

¶287

l'age I7oll'l

¶288

" 21. lr i.t noteworthv Ih t tlrc order of CBDT dctted 06.09.20: I dtals v'ith as.scssnrcnl orders .^{The .ruid} order^i.s pa.tsed in ararcisc ol 1t<ttr t'r undcr Section l44B oJ lhc Act. 'fhe orlr.'r of <)BD7 i.s tlaar that tlirection wus isstu:.l dboul passing o/ ussc.\s1tc,1t ordars b,l, tlrc National Faceless ,4ssa::m?nt⁽ t'nlrc untltr Saction llJB of lhe Acl erci:pl in nt,o stluetions. ona of vhich ts passing o/.rtssessnrcnl urders rn cascs ussigncd lo lntcrnalional^'fax Charges.

¶289

21 l'hus, rherc i'; rut ttn'ir ol doubt that Section l14l) of the Att ttttl ttrder of'^('BDT lated 06.09.2()21 give exemption fittn lollowing^{tht nouiulor.t} .laceles.r^{procedure o} b)ⁱⁿ ralation ttt ptrssing ol as.\t?.\smenl orders in coses of cenlral churges and in'lcrnational lur charges Ar) other inlerlyL'lution woultl umounl lo doing violcnce rtith^lhe kurguagt tntplolvtl in thc scheneinolificulion dated )9 0i.)():.1, Sccrrun llllit2l oJ rhc Act and ordcr^dated 06⁽⁾⁹ 20-'I Sinca rtt our viar . thc plain and unantbiguous Ionguogt' usal in tlt .tt'lttme und order dated t)6.09 2021 sho,l.; thrtt thL' ntttitt' tndtr \c'clirttt lJ8 does not Jbll wilhin the^{'ertclttio,t'} the ludenenls cited by the learned Senbr Standtng^('rnrnscl lbr lntonrc Tut Deparlment are^{oJ' tlo} tts.sislun<:t, The linytl cr i.s nov hare distmguished^beltvecn i\iRl: unl lndtun⁽ tti:ans l'hc tnticc^issued under^fecti<tn l.!8 must compl.v with the tequiremenl^{oJ the Schcmewlrcther} or not tlt'^'l'axpoS,av is Nl,'lilndion^{Citizen.Thus.lht second} litth ol ur ,tltnat ol th( i(rrnul .\enior Stattding^Lounscl /,tr lntonc lur Dcpartnrnt Llcserves to be rejected.

¶290

Page l8 of24

¶291

Wc orc in respat:tfirl dgrcement yvith lhc viey, taken bt.the Bombuv Lligh Court and are o/ the opinion thot the aforesoid underlinetl expression used in clause 3(b) of the schemc dated 29 03.2r))) locs not preclude the mandatory _faceless procedu'e [itr is.ttrttnce of trclicc under Section 148 of tha Act. Atttt othcr int crpre tutio,t. in our hunfile view, will nol only cause violencc lo the Iunguagc u.sed, bul w,ill ulso defeat the object for v.hith o tronsporent faceless procedure' was tnlroduce() Ilencc. tr,c are ttnabte to persuode ourselves lo occept o di//erent neoning lhon lhe literol meaning.flotving and conte),ed /)-om the provisions.

¶292

ln viav ,r/ /orcgting anulysis, it is clear thr.tr the re\pondent.\ have ,erred in not .following lhe mandatory -fat'clc.rs^{procedure us prescribed} in the -scheme dated 29.03.202.'. Since nolices uncler Section llB of the Acr w,ere nol is.sued tn u lhtcless manncr. lhe enlire furlher proceeding ./buntlcd^{uponit aild us.\e.\smenl} orders stand vitiated. Thus, the irnpugned nolices under Section 118 of the lct anci all con.tequ(nliol u.'e.\tnent 0rderS based thereupon are set aside. l.ibcrh, is rtstrved lo the respondents to proceed ugtrittst, thc petitioner.y in accordance with law.,'

¶293

A plain reading ol paragraph Nos.23 and 24 would make the plcture very clear so far as the fact that even though the batch of writ petitions in the case Sri Venkataramana Rcddy patloola (supra) were primarily pertaining to assessment orders in cases assigned to international tax cltarges, but the Division Be,ch has also d;alt w,ith

¶294

Page I9 of 24

¶295

the aspect of the assessment orders in cases assigned to central charges as well holding that it r,r,ould not make any diff-erence rvhether it is cases assigned to central charges or cases assigned to international tax charges. What was held was that, once when the statute substantially mandate having the assessment proceedings clrawn through automated scheme hllocation in a laceless manner, subsequently there does not seenl to be an1, exceptions carved out permitting the JAO to issue procecdings under Section 148 of the Act

¶296

In view of the sdid view expressed by the Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Sri Venkataramana Rcddy Patloola (supra), we are of the considered opinion that, il at all il we accept the analogy canvassed by the Income Tax Department. that by itsellwould be diluting the mandatc of the l-lon'ble SupFemc Court in thc case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) and at the sarne time it would also water down the series of writ petitions where the proceedings were issued by JAO and this High Court while allowing the rvrit petitions had set aside those proceedings.

¶297

The entire basis of the learned Additional Solicitor General seems to be the^judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of

¶298

¶299

l'age 20 of 21

¶300

T.K.S. Builders (l'.) Ltd.^(supra). However, since^there is^an authoritativc decision on thc said issue by this^very High Courr,^the judicial proprietl, rccluires lbr this [Jench to honor the view taken by the Divisiorr Bcnch ol'this High Court itselt-.

¶301

The llon'blc Suprerne Cor"rrt in the case of Commissioncr of Income^'l'ax, Bhopal vs. G.M., Mittal Stainless Stee! (P) Ltd.? dealing w'ith an issue of. not lollowing the^judgment of the jurisdictional High Coun, held at paragraph No.9 as under:

¶302

"9. .1put.fi-itm rht lttnguugc oJ Section 263 oJ the Income Tcu ilcr. if we \ett lo occapt rha :;ubmission of the appellont .thot the Rcvcnuc ..luthot itic.s tlithin the State cottld refuse lo follow thc iurisdit:tittnttl fligh⁽ ourt's decision on the ground lhut the dtti.st,trt o; unnc otlrr High^('ourt n,as peruling disposal h1, rhir^('ourt. it vtoull leud to an anarchic siluation wilhin lhc Slat(. l/ ut tfu tirnc vhcn lhe pov'er under,Scclion 263 was ererciscl tlit lttisirttr o/ thc lurisdrclional ltigh Court had rutt hecn stt trsitlt' lty lhis^('ourt or ot leasl futd nol been appcaled fi om. it tould not ba ope n lo lhe^{(:ommissioner} to ltave proceedcd on lh( blt.sts lhot the High Court was arrontou\ ttntl that /1,(, rr.rdssi,?g offtcer who had acted in Itrtns o.f tht l!igh^('Lttu't's tleci.sion had acted erroneously.^"

¶303

2003 11 5upreme Court Cases 441

¶304

t'agc 2 I o1'2,1

¶305

2'1. Apafl f,rom the effect of judicial propriety, rvc arc ol' the considered opinion that plain reading of the judgrnent^()l'the Hon'ble Suprenre Court in the case ol' Ashish Agarwal (suprlr) se enrs ro be more convincing and logical as compared to the -iudgntent l-reavilv relied upon by the learned Additional Solicitor (ir'nt:ral i.t-. the judgment ol'the Delhi High Codrt in the case olT.K.S. lluilders (P.) Ltd. (supla)

¶306

2ll. So f'ar as the ground'iaised by the learned Additional Solicitor Gencral that unless the'notices in cases penaining to central charges are issued by JAO it would be difficult to enfbrce the r-etlLrircnrent as is otherwise requirecl under Section l53D ol the Act is concerned, wc need to look into the provisions of Section l5il) as lo \'har ir speaks for. For ready reference. the relevant portion of' Sr:ction l5.ll) is reproduced hereunder

¶307

" 153D. Prior approval necessary for ossessment in ttscs or req uisition.

¶308

i\io order of asscssmenl or reosscssmcnl shall hL' ptt.s.strl ln tttt ,4s.ressirtg OfJicer below the rank of Joint^('ontm i..\it )nt! r in respect of each ossessmenl yccu rcJerral to itt L'ltu.:r lb1 oJ [suh-scclion (l) ofl settion 153,4 or the osse.tsnent^y(ur re_ferred to in clause (b) o[sub-section (l) ol .stt'tron l5i l). except vtith,lhe prior approval of thc Joint^('omntt.t.s iont'r.

¶309

, /

¶310

Page 2) of 24

¶311

A plain reading of the afbresaid Section would show that the provisions ol'Section l5lD would bc applicable in proceedings drawn under Section l5iA and Section l_<iB.

¶312

Section l53A of the Act speaks of how assessment in a case of search and seizurc or requisitiorr is to be made. For ready reference, the relevant portion of Section l53A is also reproduced hereunder:

¶313

' I 53,1. Assessment in cuse of search or requisition.

¶314

(l )Notwithstonding arytthing contoined in section I 39, section ll7, settion l18. -section IJ9. saction l5l ancl section l-i3, in the cuse of o Jtctsoi t,here tt seurch is iniriakl under section I32 or b,tok.t of' ttccotrnl. olher doarmenls or ony ossets ore requisitioned unrler set.tion I 32A afier the 3 t st riay o.f May, 2003 [but on or hc.[ore the Jlst tto1,61.71orrr. 202.1J, the ,l.r.r cs.r'irg t )//icer shall

¶315

(u) i..^ue rolice lo s.uch pcrson requiring him lo /irrnish within suth periotl, as may be speci/ied in tlrc rnlice lhc Nturn of- inctsne in respecl oJ euch ossestne t year Jdlting within sli assessmcnl ])eors and ./br the relevant usse.tsmcnl ),eur ot t.,enrc relcrred lo in clou.sc (b), in rhe prcscribetl ;form crnd verifed in the prestrrhed mannar and setting forlh such other purticulars as may be prescribed and rhe l.trot,isions^{of thi.r} Acr slutll, .so Jir os muy be, upply accordingll, as f such return \rere o

a I

Page 23 of 24

return required to be fttrnished under^st:r'rirtn 139:

¶320

(b) assess or reds.te.s.s the total in((tmt ol .\t\ assessment years immediulely'prccaling^t hrt assessmenl ye.r relcvanl lt) lht pr('ittlt\ t, 'it.^ttt which such search is conducted or rtquisition i: made and for the relerunl os.\as:m(nt t(.t'^t)t' yeors.^"

¶321

A plain reading of the afbresaid Section would clearlv indicate

¶322

that though Section l53A is a non-obstante clause, but nowherc does the said Section speaks of an Exception carved out tiorrr Section I^j lA. which in itself r'vas brought in by way of amendnrent to the irinance Act, 2021 w.e.t-. 01.04.2021. This in other rvords nreans tlrat until and unless there is a specific exception carved out fron'r the upplicability of Section 151A every assessment proceedings initiatctl cr e n il' it be^a fier a search and seizure proceedings, even il it be uncler cettrr:rl charges or international tax charges, the provisions of Section l5l;\ is rvhat has a to be adhered to for the purpose of initiating prrocccd ing of assessment / re-assessment. Section l5lA also does not anywllerc say that the said provision of law shall not be applica blc ln lt q tven situation ol under any other provision of larv

¶323

¶324

Pagc 24 ol24

¶325

In vierv of the sarne, wc are of the considereri opinion that the present batch of writ petitions also deserve to be and are accor<Jingly allowed quashing the impugned orders under challenge as they are in violation of the provisions Enacted by way of F inance Act, 202 I which came into lbrce u,.e.f. 01.04.2021. Accordingly, we hold thar the question of law flramed, as to^,.whether in cases assigned to centr.al charges and the notices issued therein lor reassessnrent courcr be issued by the JAo or it has to be in a faceless manner,, stancs decidccr in I'avour of the pctitioners holding that it can be i.r a faceress ,lanner alone and the question of law thus stands answered against the Itcveuue. No costs.

¶326

.A-s a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending il any, shall stand

slased-

//TRUE COPY//

SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR 16\€" oFFrcER

¶331

¶332

1 Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax, Central Circle - 3(3), Hyderabad, AayakarBhawan, Opp. LB Stadium, Basheer Baugh, Hyderabad - 500004

¶333

2 Principle Commissioner of lncome{ax (Central), Hyderabad, AayakarBhawan, Bth Floor, BasheerBagh, L.B. Stadium Road, Hyderabad-500004 The Secretary, Union of lndra, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, North-Block, New Delhi-1 1000'1

¶334

4 The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004,

¶335

5 The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 1(4), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500004,

¶336

r) Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre Government of lndia, Jawaharlal Nehru lVarg, Block B, Press Enclave, Savitri Nagar New Delhi - 1'10002

¶337

7 Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad Srgnature Towers, Sy No 6(P) of Kondapur Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serilingampally (M) R.R.Dist., Hyderabad - 500084

¶338

8 The Deputy Commissioner of lncome tax, Central Circle - 1(1), Aayakar Bhavan Hyderabad - 500004

¶339

¶340

The Office of Commissioner, lncome Tax Department, I,4inistry of Financ9, Government of lndia, New Delhi.

¶341

10.lncome Tax.Department, office of the Assistant commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 1(i) Hyderabad

¶342

1 1 . lncome.Tax Officer, Central Circle _ 1 (.1 ) Hyderabad

¶343

12.Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Circle I t'ltt'^{- --}

¶344

1 3. Assessment Unit, lncome lax Departmeht'Central Circle 1( j ) AAYKAR plly^ut,opposite L.B Stadium, e'asher Aagh, tjyOeraUaO, ft6;g;;;^"' 500004

¶345

l1 Jl " Pgp,lty^{Commissioner-of tncome, Tax,} Circte_2(1), Hyderabad

¶346

The Chief Commissioner of tncome rix iniome rri fb*lr;;, a.C. Guards, lrilasab Tank, Hyderabad S00 004.

¶347

16 The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Taxi Central Circte_1 (3), Aayakar

¶348

__^{p.havgn,7rh Ftoor. Basheerbash,} HvOeradaOtOO boa r /. rne Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department National f-aceless Assessment Centre Room, No 401, Znd Floor, ERamp Jawaharljl Nehru. Stadium, Dethi 110 003.

¶349