Bangalore Thulaseedas Srinath V. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(2)(1) and National Faceless Assessment Centre and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1

WP/14434/2024

AI Insights

The petitioner, Bangalore Thulaseedas Srinath, challenged the validity of various orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Department concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that he was unaware of the proceedings as he had not checked his registered email, despite it being active on the portal. He contended that the income in question was that of his late father, not his own, and sought an opportunity to clarify the deposits mentioned in the notices. The court noted the proceedings had continued ex-parte and found merit in granting the petitioner another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 678039 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVISHANKAR
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Ex parte proceedings; Income Tax; Notice; Opportunity to explain; Penalty
• Section: 147; 144; 144B; 148A(b); 148A(d); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 14434 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. BANGALORE THULASEEDAS SRINATH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O. LATE B.S.THULASEEDAS NO. 180, 4TH MAIN, BEML LAYOUT, BASAVESWARANAGAR BANGLAORE-560 079. PAN:GRMPS1178C … PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2)(1) BANGALORE-560 095. 2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY /ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI-110003. 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 THE OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 BMTC BUILDING KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILIP M., ADVOCATE) *** THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE UNDER SEC 148A(b) OF THE ACT, DTD 25.03.2022 BEARING DIN NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021- 22/1041520059(1) ISSUED BY THE R-1 FOR THE AY 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A. QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SEC 148A(d) OF THE ACT, DTD 05.04.2022, BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1042521529(1) ISSUED BY THE R- 1 FOR THE AY 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Petitioner has called in question the validity of the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') at Annexure-A1 as well as the subsequent proceedings including the notice under section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2; assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144, 144B of the Act at - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 Annexure-A3 and the penalty notices at Annexures-A4 and A5. 2. It is the case made out by the petitioner that though his e-mail ID was registered in the portal, however, he has never checked his email ID and hence, he was not aware of the proceedings. It is submitted that even otherwise, he has a good case on merits as information made out in Section 148-A(b) notice at Annexure-A could be clarified to the effect that the income was not that of the petitioner but that of his father. It is submitted that if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner, petitioner will be in a position to explain the deposits. 3. After hearing the matter for sometime, it is noticed that the assessment order at Paragraph No.2 does indicate that the petitioner has not made out any response to the show cause notice. Even otherwise, taking note of the contention of the petitioner that he would be in a position to explain the deposits and the present - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 proceedings could be dropped, the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the respondents. 4. Taking note that the proceedings have proceeded ex-parte and explanation is being made by the petitioner regarding non-participation in the proceedings and also noticing that the petitioner does have the explanation to be made to the notice under Section 148- A(b) of the Act, it would serve the ends of justice by affording another opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the proceedings. 5. Accordingly, the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Act at Annexure-A1; notice under section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2; assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144, 144B of the Act at Annexure-A3 and the penalty notices at Annexures-A4 and A5 are set aside. The matter is relegated to the stage of reply to the notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Act. Petitioner to make out his reply and the respondent to proceed thereafter. All contentions are kept open. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 6. Writ petition is disposed off accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE VP "