Devanur Thimmasetty Srinivasa S/o Thimma Shetty V. The Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(5) Bangalore and The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka and Goa and Assessment Unit National Faceless Assessment Centre

WP/14497/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Devanur Thimmasetty Srinivasa against the Income Tax Department, challenging the validity of various notices and orders related to the reassessment of capital gains for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner argued that the reassessment was incorrectly applied as the sale deed dated 20.07.2015 pertained to the assessment year 2016-17. Additionally, the petitioner contended that the entire sale consideration was considered as capital gains without accounting for the indexed cost of acquisition. The respondents countered that the petitioner was informed about the proceedings, which he denied. The court found prima facie merit in the petitioner's arguments, particularly noting the incorrect assessment year and the failure to consider the indexed cost of acquisition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 677992 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M THIRUMALESH
• Assessee Lawyers: LOCHANA BABU
• Keywords: Capital Gains; Income Tax; Indexed cost of acquisition; Notice Quashing; Reassessment
• Section: 148; 148A(b); 148A(d)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:26671 WP No. 14497 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 14497 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. DEVANUR THIMMASETTY SRINIVASA S/O THIMMA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, NO.729, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. LOCHANA S BABU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(5) BANGALOE, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095. 2. THE PRINICPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA AND GOA, C R BUILDING, QUEEN'S ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:26671 WP No. 14497 of 2024 INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110 003. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH., ADVOCATE) *** THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148A(b) OF THE ACT DTD 14.03.2022 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 BY THE R1 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1040720860(1) HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Petitioner has called in question the validity of the notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) at Annexure-A; the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Act at Annexure-A1; notice under Section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2 and the - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:26671 WP No. 14497 of 2024 consequential proceedings including the penalty orders at Annexures-A6 and A7. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he did not participate in the proceedings as his Accountant failed to inform regarding the proceedings initiated by the Department perhaps because the petitioner had income only from salary. It is further submitted that reassessment is sought to be made on capital gains for the assessment year 2015-16 though the sale deed itself is dated 20.07.2015 and hence, would relate to transaction to be taken note of for the assessment year 2016-17. It is further submitted that the entirety of the sale consideration is taken as capital gains as is evidenced from the assessment order without taking the indexed cost of acquisition and accordingly, it is submitted that an opportunity may be granted to make out reply to the notice under Section 148-A(b). 3. Sri. M. Thirumalesh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner cannot take - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:26671 WP No. 14497 of 2024 the contention that his accountant has not informed that the notice is issued by the Income Tax Authority. 4. It is to be noticed that the notice and the assessment proceedings are for the assessment year 2015-16. Admittedly, the sale deed is dated 20.07.2015. Prima facie the sale transaction would relate to the assessment year 2016-17. It is also noticed in the assessment order that the entirety of the sale consideration is taken without taking note of the indexed cost of acquisition. 5. In light of the above, the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Act at Annexure-A1; notice under Section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2 and the penalty orders at Annexures-A6 and A7 are set aside. 6. The petitioner is relegated to the stage of making out reply to the notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Act. All contentions are kept open. Petitioner to appear - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:26671 WP No. 14497 of 2024 before respondent No.1 on 22.08.2024 to make out his reply. 7. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- JUDGE VP "