Disposed

Mr. Nithin Kumar Chinthala v. The Income Tax Officer

Telangana HC27 Jan 2025WP/1974/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions challenged demand notices requiring deposits of Rs.29,00,000/- and 20% of disputed tax during pendency of appeals on the ground that assessment orders were passed by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer contrary to the faceless mechanism. The Court set aside the deposit orders and directed expeditious disposal of the appeals on merits without compelling deposits, without express

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 05.11.2024 and 03.01.2025 requiring deposits set aside; appellate authority to decide appeals on merits without compelling the deposits.

Mr. Nithin Kumar Chinthala Vs The Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[34^4p I fl

¶2

H|GH^couRr'?T I+E:Itlii:::::-'^-^

¶3

(sPecii'oiiginal^{Jurisdictlon;}

¶4

**^{u o*"} t^xBw Jnfl""?t i1l Mo^{N D AY r H E} Hu,SIffi PRESENT :l(

¶5

PRESENT :l( THE^{HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEFJUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} 1j THE^{HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKAYARA} It AND^1975oF2025 OS:¹⁹⁷⁴ WRITP^ETITloNN

¶6

w.P.No .1974of 2025

¶7

Between: . ^-..a ^^^.t 33 vears,^Ur?c. M r^{N ithin} rt H^,"; X )?T,3; :l:,^{l;';,y.j r?} "3"fl^{:? f BH',;Sfl ?i" 33' [?fl?l' & ;''} ri::#"P,tJ31?3?Ji,1.,n,""^, .....rrr,,,oi=

¶8

AND

¶9

t. The lncome^{Tax Officer'.Ward 6(1)' Hyderabad'lT Towers'AC Guards'} Masab^{rank, Hvd-eL9bao,;,0-!9} ??XJfl:#'ilXd, sisnature^{rowers'Sv No}

¶10

1. rhe tncome^{rax officer wil:o,'L:il;;"} opp d'otanicalGardens' 3g,l';t:il,T,'il^,:,,'#:{dtl,-'^'J::litifi::*;X'L:iffif

¶11

3 t:ffi'Jil: :^{;|:[',ff " T3,, ]#l;";' ;-i;;p'J awaharrar N ehru Stadi u n':}

¶12

. HyJrflii;r'lt%Lo'i;"'""er^{or rncome.r'1---'l rr rowers' Ac Guards'} - il;;i;k, Hvderabad^{- 500 004' Telansana'} s. The^{Joint co*.tr.,il'"i tnpp"rll)..,'"cimmissioner of lncome Tax} (Appears),Natronar;;;"#Appearcenrre'{l*I^[",.f X':T.:^ffi 81'-Chief Commissioner^{of income Tax (NaFAC)'D} 110 001.

¶13

The 110 001.^{Central Board of Direct Taxes'Represenled bv its Chairman'DepartmL:nt} of Revenue,^{Ministry of Finance' Governmentof lndia'SecretariatBuildingti'} New Delhi^{- 110001'}

¶14

-....RESPoNDEUrs

¶15

Petition|JnderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatini,he circumstances stated in the affidavit^{tiled therewith,the HighC-AUrtmaybe}

¶16

''lltr:lt

¶17

' il:".i[T]? t;.?fj"r"* y#B ;S[,#:ffi ,"1r,1d, r r ro we rs, A c G ua rd$,

¶18

"!:#s:,ri:Ii;itui:fr:l,T."ns3[?:drr,:,,,,#Wi ' I#-l',:l],:: i &"fl TbT,sffi : i:,,ff8fl, r"x-4, r r rowe rs, tr o G ua rds, 11,6 s,,, 6

¶19

'fr?i.3iili?,Hl:i:,i,ggf +:r.i[fi^.H[{'mx,;ffi il,li*;

¶20

'##qill,f ffi,i'"?,iff^{:k","aJ:m."n,:i,H,f} sJ.%ff !iBii,ffii

¶21

""ut'ooin,',f, petition Underr Articlc )rA ^E ttor nd a p r av i n s,ha,,rr,,irhe il:T,; ;iiilfi 1,:.", Jii :;';::""" Drecron decarns,j ::[IT: Tfll;1J,,:il:: ;1l..#l: Respondent vide F. ri9o. rolwardls(1)/HyolDr:manoru ofice/2024-25,dater ot o' 2025, rr directi+6$:hs petitioner to pay 20p,:rcent of the dispuied o"n' appeal of the petitic,nt Respondent here n, rc r ;"'Hj_,:"" :##=: -^{::r":il: :::illl -l;} .17^{' as arbitrarv,i!{qqar,} barred by rimitation, bac in raw, void-ao_initio, u,o,"l]u justice, aparr rrom beins vioralive or Arricres ,i:";j,lL;':::i:::tPI" Constitution of lndia and Sec 14BA of the lr rax Act 196 1; tld consequentlv set-asidr:,n".r-^ ""::":, ^:1" :'*'" the^pet tioner,s appear r:,::n:":;'ffiil :';::l"il ?i,l]' ;,::"ffi,:; justice.

¶22

l.A.NO:1 oF 2025

¶23

,1i,Ii it

¶24

Petition Under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstarrr;es sta\Ertliin the atfidavit^{filed in support of the petition,the High court may be pleasedtQ.sray} all further^{proceedings, including any recovery'eursual:]ol-'t t'oti '"} ffi the 1st^{Respondent'vide F' No lTOMardl5(1)/Hyd/DemandNrtice/zui{t} dated^{03.01'2025' in directing the Petitioner to pay 20%of the dis5ruted derrtand'}

¶25

neased tirection,^{to ssue, dec-laring the order} :1: :jff:$;ilI,'J5"Ti::j, "t-t^"::l;',"nr,". 05.11.?024. :[:$;J^{in directing the} t n"^app eal^"ar^t i1^{r t'"} No..^{ITBA/RcVtFt17t2o24'25t107012s12e(1'' o""lollo".} pending^{disposal ofhe} 'n'00'000/-' Petitioner^{to pay a t"} 't petitioner berore^{the ',,, olo"'nt" iuthoritv 'i} -^jl,, :Iff"ff::L:""',TJ"; l:; ff :lni;::^{; 1; j :'i::"H.".'":'kiil#j' * ,"-} r:::^- j1'Ji:1";i'T'Jffi ;;"::::'::['j":ffi ;:.il::;"T:l:"'i. t " Jerrv" J grant stay^{of recovery'J""atg Oitp"salof the Petitioner's appeal before 'y} i:: Appeuate^Authority.

¶26

l.A.^NO:10F2025

¶27

that^{in the circumstances$tated} Pet^{ition Under Section 151 CPC prayrng} he High^{Courtmaybe Pleasedto} in the^{affidavit filed in support of the petition ' t} including^{anY recovery'pursuantto the orderPaESed} stay^{all further Proceedings'} No..^{ITBA/RcvrntEoz+'} vide^{DIN and Letter} by the^{1st ResPondent'} he Petitioner^{to PaYa s'' m of} 2511O7O12g129(1^{)' dated 05.11.2024. in directingt} the^{Petitioner before tfre 1st} Rs. 29,00,0001,^{pendingdisposalof the aPPealof} for the^{AssessmenlYear} the^{5th ResPondent heretn'} Appellate^{Authority, i e} 2016^{-17, rendingdisPo sal of the above writ Petition'}

¶28

Counsel for^{the Petitioner : SRI SRINARAYAN TOSHNIWAL'aovocefe f,$n} ini a.v.a.stvA^KARTIKEYA Counsel^{for the Respondents: Ms' BOKARO SAPNAREDDY('tr' SC FOCr;l} INCOME^TAX) i it1it1

¶29

i it1it1 tr

¶30

w.P.NO:^{1975 0F2025}

¶31

i:r,

¶32

Between:

¶33

Ms. Mounika^{Chintala,-D/oLate Mr' Ch' Bakaj G} ",lfl ;l%1i31.'.?3f;f^E;F,ffi: Plof No. 41 to^{44, xavrColony'Mahendra} ifideraOaO^{- 50O026, Telangana'}

¶34

""'errrrffien

¶35

ANO

¶36

pending disposal of the appeal of the petitioner be the 1st Apperiare Aurpprrry, ie, the 4th Resp.nde", r,"*i, nutu'n' ;";::"'::^"l"efore for the Assessn disposat of the abc,ze ;t nent Year 2)16 ' 17, o{fo,rg it^petition; and to pass s;iff;,i:J, lf ,ff ll,+.,,lE l^, _ I s R I NARA'A N ro s H N I wA L, A D vo cA rE'() R ,:,?ffi"J l1I;"".o"ndenrs : Ms. BoKARo sApNA REDD' (Jr. sc FoR

¶37

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶38

¶39

¶40

!l<+" "^- { ,.:.::;:^{:-, --} .,/

¶41

TIIE IION'BLE^{THE ACTINGCHIEF JUSTICESUJOY PAUL}

¶42

AND

¶43

TIIE^{IION'BLESMT'JUSTICE RENUXAYARA}

¶44

oNN^{os.1974&1975 of 2o2s}

¶45

coMMON^ORDER (Per the^{Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice)}

¶46

Sri^{SrinarayanToshniwal' learned counselrepresents} Sri A.V.A.^{Siva Kartikeya'learned counselfor the petitioners and Ms'} B. Sapna^{Reddy' Iearned Junior Standing Counselfor Income Tax} DePartment,^{for the resPondents'}

¶47

, Regard^{being had to the similitude of the questions involved'} these^{matterswereanalogously heard}

¶48

It is an^{admitted fact between the parLies that the assessment} orders^{are subjectmatter of challenge before the appellate authority} wherein^{principalgroundof the petitioners is that the J urisdictional} Assessing^{Offrcer (JAO) has passed the orders'*'hereasit should have} been^{passedas per the statutory facelessmcchanismln a batch of} writ^{petitions,ad interim protections havcbeetlgrantcd by this Court'}

¶49

karned^{counsel for the pctitionerssubmitsthat during the} course^{of pendency of the petitioners' appears, r"hcy may be given} similar^{protectionand the impugncdorders datccl 05'1 1'2O24 and} O3.01.2025^{respectively'whereby Lhey were directed todeposit} Rs.29,OO,00O/-^{in W'P'No '1974 of 2025 and 2Oo/o ol the disputed} demand^{arnountin W'PNo' 1975 ol 2O25' may be stal'cd-}

¶50

5 Lear;ted Junior 2 Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department. lor the respondents fairly submits that i n similar writ petitions, thi s Court has granted such interim protection

¶51

Consi,lering the aforesaid, the i. orders dared 05.rr.2024 in w.p.No. r9z4 of 2025 andoa.,-o"""0 Ol.2O2S irr W.p.No. 1975 of 2O2S are set aside. Learned appellate au shalr decide the appears prefern:d by the petitioners expedidotot,* iy on itr; own merits, but shal not comper the petitioners to deposit the aforesaid amounts considering the,ature of the case.

¶52

Accordingly, these Writ petitions shnd disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the cases. No @sts.

¶53

Interloclltory a closed. rpplications, if any pending, shall also stand

¶54

SD/- T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII '\.._

¶55

r/ brcrION OFFICER

¶56

¶57

1 . The lncome Tax Jfficer Ward 6(1), Hyderabad

¶58

Masab Tank, H lrc^erabad - 500 004, Tetangana. IT Towers, AC Guards,

¶59

500 004, Tetangana.

¶60

1. The lncome Ta )r (Jfficer, Ward 11(1), Hyderabad, Signature Torvers, Sy No 6(P) of Kondap ur Sy No 6(P) of Kothaguda, Opp Botanical Gard ens,

¶61

2 Serilingampally itt4), Ranga Redd y District, Hyderabad - 500 OB,t Telan gana Assessment Un it, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Ce nter, Nerv New Delhi, Delhi -1100C3.Roo rn No.. 40'1, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehr-r Stad ium,

¶62

4 The Principal Commissioner of lncome Tax _ 1, ,'lT Towers. AC Clrards, .^{t,ta,ab TankHyJr-,rabad _ SOO OO+,} iefa,ii"n,

¶63

c I ne Jornt Comnissioner (Appeals) / the C6mmissioner c I Incomt_ Tax (Appeals), Natiorral Faceless Appeal Centre, O"tf,,,^.fn.orgh the principar Chiei Commissiorer of income Tax (NaFAC), Delhi, Norih Btock, New Delhi - 110 001.

¶64

The Central Boarc cf Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman^Department of Revenue, Mlnistry of Finance,^{Government of India,Secretariat Buildings,} Nerv Delhi^- 110 C01

¶65

one^{cc to SRI /.V.A.SlvAKARTIKEYA, Advocate [OPUC]}

¶66

; o;"^{CCto tr,4s uOKARO SAPNA REDDY(Jr' SC FoR lNCot"lE} TAX) Advocate IOPUC]

¶67

9.^{Two CD CoPies} SA 4/ GJP^/

HIGH COUR'r

DATED:2ilA1nOZs

COMMON ORDER

WP.Nos.1974 AND 1975 of ZO2S

¶72

ot( 1 H E S 14
.(. Y L
{
ai i
o I
f r/ r ffAg ru:5 i I
i
\i:
1."/
\r'\-
'{.- :^,. j ). 'r'

¶73

DISPOSING OIT BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSiTS.

¶74

// /,t /1 t4 /,t

Mr. Nithin Kumar Chinthala v. The Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Nithin Kumar Chinthala v. The Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Nichino Chemical India Private Limited Vs Union of India

Ms. Mounika Chintala Vs The Income Tax Officer

Dr.Buggaveedi Prathyusha Vs State of Telangana