DHOOTHAPPA GOPALAPPA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/10066/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Dhoothappa Gopalappa, the petitioner, who challenged the assessment order and subsequent demand notice issued by the Income Tax Officer for the assessment year 2017-2018. The petitioner argued that the assessment was made without an opportunity for a hearing, despite being a regular taxpayer employed at SKF India Limited. The respondent contended that the order was appealable and that the petitioner had been given an opportunity to be heard, which he did not avail. The court found merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the lack of a hearing and thus set aside the orders, remanding the case for a proper hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 754084 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: VENKATESH
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Opportunity of Hearing; Scrutiny; Writ petition
• Section: 143(3); 156

Judgement Text

" - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION No.10066 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: DHOOTHAPPA GOPALAPPA S/O SRI. DHOOTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS NO.2, HOSUR MAIN ROAD BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA BANGALORE – 560 099 PRESENTLY R/AT NO.124/2 KUMARADHARA NILAYA PRAKRUTHI LAYOUT, 5TH MAIN SRIKANTHAPURA, ANCHEPALYA BEHIND PRESTIGE JINDAL BANGALORE – 560 073 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH G., ADV.) AND: INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3)(7) HMT BHAWAN NO.59, BELLARY ROAD GANGANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 032 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K. V. ARAVIND, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO - 2 - QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26.12.2019 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 IN ANNEXURE-A1 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R The instant writ petition is filed challenging the correctness of the assessment order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1023161702(1) dated 26.12.2019 passed by the respondent under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Annexure – A1 to the writ petition and the subsequent demand bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1023161812(1) dated 26.12.2019 issued by the respondent under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017- 2018 vide Annexure – A2 to the writ petition. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is an individual, employed as a workmen in a private company by name SKF India Limited and that he is paying taxes regularly and has not committed any default. However, as his case was taken up for scrutiny by respondent authority - 3 - and without giving an opportunity of hearing, the impugned assessment order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1023161702(1) dated 26.12.2019 at Annexure – A1 to the writ petition has been passed and thereafter, as determined in the impugned assessment order a demand notice bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1023161812(1) dated 26.12.2019 vide Annexure – A2 to the writ petition has been issued. Aggrieved by the same, the instant writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order under challenge is an appealable order. He further submits that the petitioner though given an opportunity of hearing has not availed of the same. For the aforementioned reasons, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been able to present his case before the assessing authority. The case of the petitioner is that if he is given an opportunity, he would be able to establish that he has paid all the necessary taxes - 4 - in accordance with law and the conclusion arrived at by the assessing authority is erroneous. It is further submitted that as the entire case is on the ground of not providing an opportunity of hearing to him, writ petition is maintainable. 5. Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if the impugned orders are set aside and opportunity be given to the petitioner to present his case before the assessing authority subject to petitioner depositing 10% of the amount as demanded in the impugned order at Annexure – A2. Hence, the following:- ORDER (i) The impugned assessment order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019- 20/1023161702(1) dated 26.12.2019 vide Annexure – A1 to the writ petition and demand notice bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1023161812(1) dated 26.12.2019 vide Annexure – A2 to the writ petition both passed by respondent are hereby set aside subject to petitioner depositing 10% of the amount demanded in - 5 - the demand notice at Annexure – A2 to the writ petition. (ii) The matter stands remanded back to the respondent and the respondent is directed to take appropriate decision after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to present his case in accordance with law. (iii) The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE MH/- "