Ashish Gajanana Asgekar and Pavithra Sankaran and Thejesh Gangaiah Nagarathna and Kiran Jonnalagadda V. Union of India, Ministry of Finance and Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT)

WP/14383/2019

AI Insights

The writ petition filed by Ashish Gajanana Asgekar and others challenged the order issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) mandating the linking of PAN with Aadhaar by 31st March 2019. The petitioners sought to quash this order and prevent any adverse actions for non-linkage under Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They argued that the mandate was inconsistent with Supreme Court directions in the case of Justice K.S. Puttuswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, which addressed privacy concerns and the mandatory nature of linking Aadhaar with other identifiers. The respondents, represented by the Union of India and CBDT, noted that the deadline for linking had been extended multiple times, with the latest extension to 01.04.2023. The court's decision to dispose of the petition with liberty to refile was based on the possibility of further extensions and ongoing legal interpretations regarding the mandatory linking of Aadhaar with PAN.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 803872 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Justice K.S. Puttuswamy (Retd.) and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: MOHAMMAD AFEEF
• Keywords: Aadhaar; Income Tax; Linking; PAN; Supreme Court; Justice K.S. Puttuswamy
• Section: 119; 139AA[2]

Judgement Text

" - 1 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14383 OF 2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. ASHISH GAJANAN ASGEKAR, AGED 46 YEARS, #236, 5TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, BEL LAYOUT, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU-560097. 2. PAVITHRA SANKARAN, AGED 38 YEARS, 3076/5, 4TH CROSS, GOKULAM PARK, MYSORE-570002. 3. THEJESH GANGAIAH NAGARATHNA, AGED 38 YEARS, NO.699, BEHIND SUVIDYA COLLEGE, KAMMASANDRA, BANGALORE-560100. 4. KIRAN JONNALAGADDA, AGED 34 YEARS, NO.141/142, 2ND CROSS, PAI LAYOUT, HULIMAVU GATE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560076. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD AFEEF, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SIDDI SAVITHA A., ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINACE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DLEHI-11001. REPRESENTED BY SECREARY (REVENUE) 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, ASG FOR R-1; SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FILED PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.6.2018 ISSUED UNDER SEC.119 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE RESPONDENT 2 HEREIN MANDATING LINKING OF PAN WITH AADHAAR BY 31ST MARCH, 2019 [PLACED AS ANNEXURE-A]; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO REFRAIN FROM INITIATING ADVERSE ACTION UNDER S.139AA[2] AND THE PROVISO TO S.139AA[2] OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 READ WITH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE, FOR NON- LINKAGE OF PAN WITH AADHAAR; DIRECT RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN JUDGEMENTS DATED 24.8.2017 AND 26.9.2018. IN THE CASE OF JUSTICE K.S.PUTTUSWAMY [RETD.] AND ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [W.P.[CIVIL] NO.494/2012] PRIOR TO MAKING IT MANDATORY TO LINK PAN WITH AADHAAR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 ORDER The petitioners have filed this petition for the following reliefs: “1. For quashing the Impugned Order dated 30.06.2018 issued under s.119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Respondent No.2 herein mandating linking of PAN with Aadhaar by 31st March 2019 (placed as Annexure - A). 2. For directions to the Respondents to refrain from initiating adverse action under s.139AA(2) and the proviso to s.139AA(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with the Impugned Notice, for non- linkage of PAN with Aadhaar 3. For directions Respondents to comply with the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in judgments dated 24.08.2017, and 26.09.2018, In the case of Justice K.S. Puttuswamy (Retd.) and Anr. v. Union of India &Ors. (W.P. (Civil) No. 494 of 2012) prior to making it mandatory to link PAN with Aadhaar”. 2. The petitioners’ essential grievance, and the reason for the reliefs as aforesaid, is that the apprehension that the Revenue will insist upon linking of Aadhaar card with the PAN card under the provisions of Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act, - 4 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 1961 [for short, ‘IT Act’] notwithstanding certain directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Justice K.S.Puttuswamy (Retd.) and Anr v. Union of India and Ors reported in AIR 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1462. 3. Sri. Mohammad Afeef, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court could dispose of the petition with directions as contained in the decision of a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat in Special Civil Application No.17329/2017, and the directions referred to by him read as below: “It is ordered that PAN of the applicant shall not be declared inoperative and the applicant would not be in default in any proceedings only for the reason that the permanent account number is not linked with Aadhaar or Aadhaar number is not quoted and the applicant shall not be subjected to the provsio to sub-section (2) of section 139AA of the Act till the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. and others in Civil Application NO. - 5 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 8588 of 2019 is delivered and available. Rule is made absolute accordingly to the aforesaid extent.” 4. Sri K.V.Aravind, the learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that during the pendency of this petition, Rule 114AAA is inserted in Income Tax Rules 1962 with effect from 13.02.2020. In terms of this Rule, in effect the last date for linking the Aadhaar card as contemplated under sub-Section (2) of Section 139AA of the IT Act is notified as 31.03.2020. However, by appropriate circulars this last date has been extended from time to time. The recent order in this regard is on 30.03.2022 in Order F.No.370142/14/2020 and in terms of this order, the last date is now extended up to 01.04.2023. As such, there is no reason for any apprehension. 5. When queried, Sri.K.V.Aravind submits that the circulars could be issued because the second decision in the case of Justice K.S. Puttuswamy - 6 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 supra is referred to a larger bench in Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Limited and there could be possible extension even for the period beyond 01.04.2023. In fact, Sri K.V.Aravind submits that the petition could be disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition in the event there is no order for extending the timeline beyond 01.04.2023. 6. On a careful consideration of these submissions, and because this Court could reasonably opine that with the subsequent events, the petitioners’ apprehension that there would be inconsistence on the requirement of informing the Aadhaar number for filing returns is vastly addressed, the petition must be disposed of with necessary liberty in the event there is no extension for the period beyond 01.04.2023. As such, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh petition in the event there is no - 7 - WP No. 14383 of 2019 extension of time for furnishing the Aadhaar card beyond 01.04.2023. SD/- JUDGE SA ct:sr "