Ganapathi Agricultural Co-operative Society Ltd., 'Sahakari Sadana', Main Road, Kemmannu, Udupi-576 115, represented by its C.E.O. Mr. Mahesh Salian V. Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi-110001 and Income Tax Officer, Ware-1 and TPS, Aayakar Bhavan, Adi-Udupi Malpe Road, Udupi-576103

WP/20029/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Ganapathi Agricultural Co-operative Society Ltd., which filed a writ petition against the Assessment Order and Demand Notice issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre and the Income Tax Officer, respectively. The petitioner challenged the exparte Assessment Order and the accompanying Demand Notice, arguing that they were issued without providing a reasonable opportunity to respond, as required under the principles of natural justice. The court examined the timeline and the procedural fairness of the assessment process, particularly focusing on the short notice period provided to the petitioner to respond.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799422 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAVI RAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH UPPIN
• Keywords: Bonafide reasons; Exparte assessment order; Faceless Assessment Scheme; Sufficient cause; Unavoidable circumstances
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:33293 WP No. 20029 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.20029 OF 2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. GANAPATHI AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., ‘SAHAKARI SADANA’, MAIN ROAD, KEMMANNU, UDUPI-576 115, REPRESENTED BY ITS C.E.O. MR. MAHESH SALIAN, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110001. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARE-1 AND TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, ADI-UDUPI MALPE ROAD, UDUPI-576103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAVI RAJ Y.V., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE R1 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-G AND TO QUASH THE DEMAND Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:33293 WP No. 20029 of 2021 NOTICE DATED 20.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE R1 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-H. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (i) Quash the Assessment Order dated 20.09.2021 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/ 143(3)/2021-22/1035717215(1) issued by the 1st respondent marked as Annexure ”G” by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari; (ii) Quash the Demand Notice dated 20.09.2021 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22- 1035717244(1) issued by the 1st respondent marked as Annexure “H” by issuing a writ in the nature or certiorari; (iii) Grant such other relief as may be deemed fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of equity and justice. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. A perusal of the material on record would - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33293 WP No. 20029 of 2021 indicate that on 31.08.2021, respondent No.1 issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘IT Act’) in relation to assessment proceedings in respect of assessment year 2016-17 under Faceless Assessment Scheme. Under the said notice, the petitioner was directed to furnish reply on or before 04.09.2021 i.e., within a period of three days from the date of the said notice. It is the grievance of the petitioner that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner could not issue a reply within an extremely short period of three days and the reply dated 06.09.2021 submitted by him was not considered by respondent No.1, who proceeded to pass the impugned exparte Assessment Order at Annexure-G dated 20.09.2021 without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of present petition. 3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition. 4. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a perusal of the material on record, including the notice dated 31.08.2021 and the impugned Assessment - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33293 WP No. 20029 of 2021 Order would indicate that apart from the fact that the notice provides only an extremely short period of three days for the petitioner to submit his reply, the impugned Assessment Order is clearly an exparte order which has been passed before providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and as such, the same deserves to be quashed and the matter remitted back to respondent No.1 for re- consideration from the stage of issuance of notice at Annexure-E dated 31.08.2021 and to proceed further in the mater. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned Assessment Order at Annexure-G dated 20.09.2021, is hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 to the stage of the petitioner submitting the reply to the notice and to proceed further in the matter after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hearing him in accordance with law. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:33293 WP No. 20029 of 2021 (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit reply, additional reply, documents, etc. which shall be considered by respondent No.1 who shall proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3 "