Satya Narayanamurthy Kaki Vs National Faceless Assessment Center (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Summary: The Andhra Pradesh High Court allowed a batch of writ petitions challenging assessment orders concerning AY 2015-16. The petitioners relied on the Supreme Court decisions in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. CBDT and Asstt. CIT v. Nehal Ashit Shah, contending that the notices and consequential proceedings were unsustainable under the applicable Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 framework. They also referred to the Supreme Court’s order dated 4 May 2026 in SLP (Civil) No. 2055 of 2025.
The Department’s counsel accepted that the matter was covered by the Supreme Court decisions. The High Court reproduced the Supreme Court’s observation that notices concerning AY 2015-16 were liable to be struck down in terms of the Department’s concession recorded in paragraph 19(f) of Rajeev Bansal and reiterated before the Supreme Court. Since the assessment proceedings before the High Court related undisputedly to AY 2015-16 and had been initiated pursuant to notices issued after 1 April 2021, the Court held that the impugned orders were unsustainable. It accordingly allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned orders without costs and closed the pending miscellaneous applications.
Cases Discussed
- Supreme Court common order dated 4 May 2026, including SLP (Civil) No. 2055 of 2025 — The High Court reproduced its observation concerning the invalidity of the relevant AY 2015-16 notices in view of the Department’s concession recorded in paragraph 19(f) of Rajeev Bansal.
- Asstt. CIT v. Nehal Ashit Shah, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1755, Supreme Court — Cited by the petitioners in support of their challenge to the AY 2015-16 proceedings; the Department accepted that the matter was covered by the Supreme Court decisions.
- Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, (2025) 476 ITR 369 (SC) — Cited in support of applying the Revenue’s concession concerning the relevant notices issued for AY 2015-16.
- Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC) — Paragraph 19(f), recording the Revenue’s concession concerning AY 2015-16 notices issued on or after 1 April 2021 under the relevant TOLA framework, formed the basis of the relief granted.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Challenge in the present batch of writ petitions is to the orders pertaining to the Assessment Order 2015-16, on various grounds. In view of the same, the writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners made submissions by relying on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal 469 ITR 46 (SC), Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. CBDT 169/476 ITR 369 (SC), as also Asstt. CIT v. Nehal Ashit Shah 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1755. They contend that the impugned proceedings in respect of the Assessment Year 2015-15 are not sustainable in the light of the decisions cited supra. It is their contention that in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal, the notices issued for the Assessment Year 2015-16 on or after 01.04.2021 and the action taken thereon is not valid in Law, in the light of the period prescribed under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. Referring to Order dated 04.05.2026 in S.L.P. (Civil) No.2055 of 2025, they further submit that the said aspect is reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
3. Mr. B.Vamsi Krishna, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, on instructions submits that the matter is covered by the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
4. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the impugned proceedings are pertaining to the Assessment Year 2015-16. In the latest decision referred to supra, the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia observed as follows:
“5. There is no quarrel that if the instant cases are found to pertain to Assessment Year 2015-16, then the impugned notices are liable to be struck down outrightly in terms of the concession on behalf of the Department recorded in paragraph 19 (f) of Rajeev Bansal (supra) and reiterated before us by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India.”
5. As the Assessment Proceedings in respect of the Assessment Year 2015-16 were initiated pursuant to notices issued after 01.04.2021, the impugned orders are not sustainable.
6. In the light of the undisputed legal and factual position, the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. No costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
Notes:
1 (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC)
2 (2025) 476 ITR 369 (SC)
3 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1755
