Dr. Madhukar G Angur V. The Commissioner of Income Tax and The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle (2) (4) Bangalore

WP/2911/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Dr. Madhukar G Angur, the petitioner, who contested an assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle (2)(4), Bangalore. The petitioner argued that due to ongoing litigation concerning the management of M/s. Alliance University, he was unable to provide a complete response to the tax authorities, which led to the impugned order. The respondents opposed the petition, citing the lack of merit and the existence of an appeal already filed by the petitioner. However, the petitioner later decided to withdraw the appeal, seeking a fresh opportunity to present his case. The court, considering the circumstances and the need for a fair hearing, set aside the previous order and remitted the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797765 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREEHARI KUTSA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Re-consideration; Writ petition
• Section: 144; 153

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:8062 WP No. 2911 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 2911 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: DR. MADHUKAR G ANGUR AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS S/O LATE GUDAPPA ANGUR FLAT No.03, G-BLOCK, MANTRI ESPANA NEAR SAKRA WORLD HOSPITAL OUTER RING RAOD, KARIYAMMANA AGRAHARA BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 560 103. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHREEHARI KUTSA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HMT BHAWAN GST COMMISSIONERATE BLOCK 59, HMT BHAVAN, 3RD FLOOR, BALLARI ROAD DENA BANK COLONY, GANGANAGAR, 59 DENA BANK COLONY, ARMANE NAGAR BENGALURU KARNATAKA - 560 032. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE (2) (4) BANGALORE HMT BHAWAN GST COMMISSIONERATE BLOCK 59, HMT BHAVAN, 3RD FLOOR, BALLARI ROAD DENA BANK COLONY, GANGANAGAR, 59 DENA BANK COLONY, ARMANE NAGAR BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSITITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 31/12/2021 PASSED BY THE R-2 I.E., LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE (2)(4), BANGALORE, U/S 153 R.W.S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONDUCT AN Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:8062 WP No. 2911 of 2023 ENQUIRY AFRESH VALIDITY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned assessment order at Annexure-B1 dated 31.12.2021 and for other reliefs. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondents and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of the litigation between the petitioner and the impleading applicant, in relation to the management of M/s. Alliance University, the petitioner could not submit full / complete response along with all documents to respondent No.2 who has proceeded to pass the impugned order, aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. It is submitted that if one more opportunity is provided, the petitioner would submit a detailed response / reply along with all documents before respondent No.2 who may be directed to re-consider the claim of the petitioner, in accordance with law. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:8062 WP No. 2911 of 2023 4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted that petitioner has preferred an appeal and as such, the question of entertaining the present petition before this Court would not arise in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would unconditionally withdraw the appeal filed by him before the appellate authority. 6. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. 7. Learned counsel for the impleading applicant submits that in the event this Court were to set-aside the impugned order and remit the matter back the matter to the second respondent for re-consideration afresh, all rival contentions between petitioner and impleading applicant are to be kept open to be decided in the appropriate proceedings. 8. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the specific assertion on part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit the detailed / complete / total reply - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:8062 WP No. 2911 of 2023 along with all documents to respondent No.2 was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions between the petitioner / respondents / impleading applicant and in order to provide one more opportunity in favour of the petitioner to submit the complete / total / detailed reply along with all documents, I deem it appropriate to adopt justice oriented approach and to set-aside the impugned assessment order at Annexure-B1 dated 31.12.2021 and remit the matter back to respondent No.2 for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law. 9. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Impugned assessment order at Annexure-B1 and all consequential orders, notices, etc., are hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to second respondent for re-consideration afresh, consideration in accordance with law. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:8062 WP No. 2911 of 2023 (iv) All rival contentions between petitioner / respondents / impleading applicants including issues / questions regarding jurisdiction are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0 "