The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 o'f the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of [\/andamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in rejecting the stay Application of the Petitioner dated 2410712025 filed on 2510712025, without even granting an opportunity of being heard vide orders dated 2810712025 f or the Assessment Year 2015-16 under the lncome Tax Act,196',l as arbitrary, contrary to the Provisions of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 and consequently set aside the same as null and void and grant stay of collection of disputed demand as per section 156 of the lncome Tax Act,1961 pending disposal of the appeal before the 3rd Respondent. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further Proceedings in pursuance of the Assessnrent Order passed by the 2nd Respondent dated 2210312024, for the Assessment Year 2015-16, under the lncome Tax Act, 1961 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: MS. SHAIK VAHEEDA SUSHMA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: MS. BOKARO SAPNA REDDY (sENloR sc rNcoME TAx) Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K.L.N. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, REPRESENTING UNION OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO W.P.No.23353 OF 2025 OR-DER, (per Hon'ble Sri.lusrit'e P.Sam Koshy) Heard Ms.Shaik Vaheeda Sushma, leamed counsel for the pctitioner, Ms. Bokaro Sapna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing for respondent Nos.l to 3 and Mr. K.L.N.Raghavendra Reddy, leamed counsel representing Union of India for respondent No.4. Perused the record.

2. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order daLed 28.07.2025 in directing the petitioner to pay 20o/o of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appeal before the Appellate Authority for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

3. The petitioner herein had filed statutory remedy of an appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 196l (for short, the 'Act') before the Appellate Authority. Atong with the Memo of Appeal, the petitioner had also preferred lntenm protection so far as the recovery proceedings are concerned under Section 220(6) of the Act. It is this application which stands 2 decided by the impugned order directing the petitioner for payment of the amounts stated above.

4. The contention of the leamed counsel lor the petirioner is that the Assessrnent Order dated 28.07.2025 itself, in the light of the Division Bench ol this Court in the case ol' Kankanala Ravindra Reddy vs. Income Tax Officerr, is not sustainable as the notice under Section 148 was issued by the jurisdictionat Assessing Officer, whereas, as per the amended provision of the Act, that ought to had been issued in the Faceless manner. He further submits that the assessment of the petitioncr themselves carried out in a similar manner for the subsequent period was already subjected to challenge before this Court for the Assessment Year 2014-15 vide W.P.No.l2348 of 2023 and the said writ petition stood allowed vide order dated 07.11.2023.1n rhe light of the aforesaid two decisions, there is all liketihood of the appeal pending before the Appellate Authority also having rhe same fate of the Assessmcnt Oider not being maintainable and being set as ide. ' 120231 156 t"r."nn.com 178(TELANGANA) 3

5. In the tight of the subsequent amendments brought in the Act as also in the light of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & ors., v. Ashish Agarwal and others2, the Assessing Authority ought to had granted interim protection to the Assessee till finalization of the appeal which the Assessing Authority has not considered.

6. The contention of the leamed counsel for the petitioner so far as the 148 notice issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer not being in dispute by the leamed Standing Counsel for the Department and also in the light of the aforesaid judgments rendered by this Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy I I (supra l) and in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ashish Agarwal (supra 2), we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Authority in the course of deciding the petition under Section 220(6) of the Act, ought to have taken a more pragmatic view and should had kept the recovery proceedings in abeyance, pending the appeal before the I I Appellate Authority. '2ozzSCC online SC 543( 4

7. For the aforesaid reasons, we dispose of thc presc'nt writ - petition at this juncture directing the Assessing Otflcer not to pursue with the recovery proceedings in terms of tlte impugned order dated 28.07.2025 till the appeal lor the Assessment Year 2015-16 is finally decided. 8 Considering the fact that the appeal was filcd in rhe year 2024, we expect that the Appellate Authority shall take up the appeal and decide the same at the earliest, preferabty. within a period of six (06) weeks ftom the date of receipt ol a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Conseqtrently, miscellaneous applications, perrding if any, shall stand closed. \ VANI SWAMY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII \i SECTION OFFTCER of Finance, Delhi. '1 . The lncome Tax Officer, Ward _ 6 (1), Hvderabad. 2- The Assessment Unit. Governmeni ,ii iniiii, rn-.o-re Ta < Department. Ministry 3. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals), lncome Tax Department, , Nationat Facetess Appeat Centre (Ni Ci 6;ihiiio oo: z+. r ne secretary. Union of lndia, Ministry oi Finance. 64. 3rd Floor, Jeevan _ Deep B^uitdin!. Sansad Nltrrs, irt"* DLini' 5. one CC to Ms. Shaik V^aheeda Sushma Advocate tOpUCl 6 one CC to IVs. Bokaro Sapna neJoy (Se'"ioi3t'in.or" Tax) [opUC] 7 9lg p_C_lg_Sri K L.N RaghavenOr" ftJOJV,"ref,ris"nt,n,r Union of lndia[OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies ' "'"""" To, TJ GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0710812025 ORDER WP.No.23353 of 2025 B r' =::.-\ .,oi+ t l"'] t,:) 2 g AIJG 2025 \ a\ I * D DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS q