Mr. Kumara Swamy Bairi, Vs The Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

Mr. Kumara Swamy Bairi, Vs The Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 21-11-2024 rejecting the stay application set aside; matter restored to Respondent No. 1's file with appearance fixed for 10-02-2025 and the stay application to be decided afresh in accordance with law; liberty granted to file a fresh application for lifting restrictions on the bank account; no costs; interim applications closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 21-11-2024 of Respondent No. 1 rejecting the petitioner's stay application (pending the AY 2017-18 appeal) should be set aside and the stay application decided afresh, the point being stated to be covered by W.P.No.228 of 2025. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the order in W.P.No.228 of 2025, the impugned order dated 21-11-2024 is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Respondent No. 1.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner shall appear before Respondent No. 1 on 10-02-2025, for which no separate notice will be issued, and Respondent No. 1 shall decide the stay application afresh in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

It will be open to the petitioner to file another application for lifting of restrictions on the bank account.ratio¶47
The writ petition is disposed of without costs, and pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand closed.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Sujoy Paul, Acting Chief Justice, penning the order, and Renuka Yara, J.) disposed of Writ Petition No. 2776 of 2025 on 03-02-2025, with the consent of both sides, in terms of the Court's own earlier order in W.P. No. 228 of 2025 (decided 09-01-2025), which is reproduced in the judgment. The order dated 21-11-2024 (DIN ITBAJCOM/F/1712024-2511070528271(1)) of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1) rejecting the petitioner's stay application - filed pending his appeal before the Appellate Authority for Assessment Year 2017-18 - was set aside and the matter restored to Respondent No. 1's file. The petitioner was to appear before Respondent No. 1 on 10-02-2025 (no separate notice required) and Respondent No. 1 was to decide the stay application afresh in accordance with law; liberty was given to move afresh for lifting of restrictions on the bank account (recovery notices dated 23-01-2025 had been challenged vis-a-vis ICICI Bank Ltd. and Axis Bank Ltd.). Petition disposed of without costs; pending interim applications stood closed. The reproduced W.P. No. 228 of 2025 order records counsel's submissions invoking Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. (2018(7) TMI 1905 - SC Order), APR Jewellers Private Limited v. CIT(A), Hyderabad-I (2022(51) TMI 1067) and a Zoos and Parks Authority of Telangana case, for the proposition that a quasi-judicial authority must apply an independent mind and not be bound by administrative circulars (CBDT OMs of 29.02.2016 and 31.07.2017); these submissions are recorded within the quoted earlier order, not decided afresh here.

[³⁴⁴⁶ J

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

IVONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

WRIT PETITION NO: 2776 OF 2025

Between

lvlr. Kumara Swamy Bairi, Flat No 202 Prime Castle Aparlments, Nizampet, Bachupally, Hyderabad -500 090

...PET|T|ONER AND

The lncome Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Signature Towers, Sy.No.6(plof [95r-o3qu1.S.V,a1(P)^{of Kothag!da, Opp. BotanicatGarden!, Sedin!ampaily} (M), R.R.District, Hyderabad, Tetangana, 500084

Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National e-Assessment Center, New Delhi, Room No. 4O1,2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi 110 003.

The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department gl Rgvgftye, M!rys-try of Finance, Government of lnilia, Secrelariat Buildings, NewDelhi - 110 001.

The Joint Commissioner (Appeals), The Commrssioner of lncome Tax eppgqls),^{National Fageless ApaeatCentre, Dethi,Through the principat} Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax (NaFAC), Delhi, NorttiBlock, New Delhi 1 10 001

lclcl Bank L!d-, Jyothi Arcade, Door No.7168/7, tvtain Road, chatkesar,

^{$algareddy Dist 501301 Represented by its manager}

Axis Bank Limited, 7th Floor, C-2, Wadia lnternational Centre, Axis house, Pandrang Bdhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai - 400025, Maharashtra.

...RESPONDENTS

.^{Petition underArticle 226 of lhe Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring i. That the order passed by the Respondent No. 1 vide DIN ITBAJCOM/F/1712024-2511070528271(1) dated 21-11-2024, in rejecting the stay application filed by the Petitioner, pending disposal of the appeal of the Petitioner before the Pt Appellate Authority, i.e., the 5th Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2017-18, as arbitrary, illegal, barred by limitation, bad in law,

void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural justice, apart frorn being violative of Articles 14, 1 9( 1 )(g) and 265 of the Constitution of lndia and tiec 220 of the lncome Tax Act 1961, and consequently set-aside the same and grant stay of recovery, pending disposal of the Petitioners appeal before. the Appellate Authority, in the lnterests of justice and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ii. That recovery rrotice issued by Respondent No. 1 vide DtN. TTBAJCOM/F/17 /2024-2511072,14177 4(1) and |IBNCOT\AIFl17l2024- 2511072441895(1) both dated Z3-O1-'.2_OZ5 to rhe respondent no.ⁱ³ and 7 bad in law, void-ab-initio, violative of the principles of natural^justice, apart from being violative of Articles i , t9(1Xg) and 265 of the Constitution of lrdra and Section 22O oI lhe lncome Tax /\ct, 1961 , and consequenlly set-aside the same and grant stay of recovery, pendrng disposal of the Petitionels appeal before the Appellate Authority, in the interest:; of justice_

lA NO: 1 OF 202!i

Petition und-^r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay operation of order rearing DIN ITBNCOMIF 117 t2O24-2Sl1O7OS2827 1(t) dated 21_ 11-2024 passed by Respondenl No. 1.

lA NO: 2 OF 202ai

Petition undr-'r section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High court may be pieased to stay operation of orcer bearing DIN |TBA/COM/F|1712O24-25t1072441895( 1) and IBNCOM|FllTl2O2-4- 2511O724417t4(1) both dated 23-01-2O:2!j passed by Respondent No. 1.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt VENKATA PRASAD.p Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 4: Ms. J.SUNITHA, JUNTOR SC FOR tTD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S & 6: --

The Court made the following: ORDER

7

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CIIIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAI'L

AND

TIIE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

WRIT PETITION No.2776 of 2o25

ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paut)

Sri Venkata Prasad P., learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. J. Sunitha, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4

2 With the consent, frnally heard.

At the outset, learned counsel for both the parties urge that the point involved in this matter is squarely covered !y recent order passed by this Court in W.P.No.228 of 2025 decided on O9.O1.2O25 and this petition may be disposed of in terms of said order.

4 The aforesaid order in W.P.No.228 of 2025 reads thus:

"3. The challenge is mounted to the order^dated 17.L2.2O24 (Annexure P1O), whereby the petitioner's stay application has been rejected by respondent^{No. 1.}

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rejection order shows that it is solely based on CBDT OMs dated 29.02.2016 and 31.O7.2O17. The^{Apex Court} had an occasion to consider this aspect in^Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 5 & ors. v.^M/s.LG Electronics India Pvt.Ltd.,l and this Court in^APR Jewellers Private Limited v. The Commissioner^of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-I and another2^and M/ s.Zoos and Parks Authority of^{Telangala v.the} Commissioner of Income Tax 1 2018^{(7) TMI 1905} -^SC Order 2 2022⁽⁵¹ TMI 1067 2 Exemptions^andanother3. It is submitted that the Courts opined^{that respondent} No. 1 being a quasi^judicial authority^{should applyits} independent mind and sha-Il not be^{boundby the} administrative circulars. Thus, it is^{prayedthat the said} rejection order dated t7.12.2024^{may be set aside and}

I \

2

resp(rndent No. 1 may be directed to decide the stay application afresh within the stipulated time.

The other side has no objection to this innocuous praFor.

,A,r:cordingly, the impugned order dated 77.12.2!.024 is set aside. Resultaltly, the stay application is revived. The petitioner shall appear before the appcllate autirority on 13.01.2025. The appellate authoritv shall decide the stay application afresh, in accordance with lau.,^.vithin 15 days therefrom.

7 . Th,e Writ Petition is disposed of, without expr essing any opinion on the merits of the case. No ordel as to costs."

In vie',.', of said order, the impugned order daterl 2I.11.2024 is set aside. The matter is restored in the hle of respondent No. 1. The petitioner sha1l appear before respondent No.1 ort 1O.O2.2O25 for which no separate notice will be required to be issued. Respondent l,Io. 1 shall decide the stay application of th e petitioner afresh in acc,lldance with law. It will be open for the iretitioner to file another application for lifting of restrictions orL the bank account.

6 The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

InterJ.ocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand

closed

6-

To

SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT R EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// Jr,,\ VS ECTION OFFICER

The lnc,lre Tax Ot'ficer. Ward 1,1(1), Signature Towers, Sy.No.6(p) ol K o nd a p u r . S y 3 z( p ) o f K o t h a grd a, 6 p p : B;i; e"n-i, s e a i n g a m p a r r y

2 Assessrn,.:nt ( M ) -R Ft l)isrlct,. Unit, H tncome yderabad,ieta;g;fia, Tr1 pgojrtl.1i, 5d0db?Nii,onar " i ";i'c;r"o e-Asses sment Center, 40 r, 2nd Frbor, E_Ril;, i;;;,iLj ru"r,r., stadium,

N:W B:li ,i3,ilNo.

3 The Charirman. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department,)l Revenue, yll,s^rly . rinance, Government oi i"oi"l'S"irJtlli"ri"au'iiii,,,l. NewDelhi _

I lL I

lltJUUt

4 t'-"fr $Hiff lH;if +,{,lii""#€i,,ui,^ur,,E$"r^:,m,*^

,fri&3f

6 7. o o

PSK. H$w,;.gg,ffi'm:i. KKS

I

HIGH COUR.']-

DATED:0310i112025

ORDER \

WP.No.2776^{of 2025}

dE STAr E
f.
( o )
,,}
i l rqr n lull
-{:.
-l
.i rr, r,--( --.'

DISPOS!NG OF^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT CIOSTS

/{ 4.^/< r9^/t/.2t