Girish Aradhya Rudraradhya V. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax VI Division, Bengaluru West Commissionerate

WP/17234/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Girish Aradhya Rudraradhya against the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax VI Division, Bengaluru, challenging an order and recovery proceedings related to income tax assessments for the years 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18. The petitioner alleged that he did not receive the notices preceding the impugned order, which prevented him from contesting the proceedings or submitting necessary documents. The court, considering the petitioner's claim of not receiving the notices and the circumstances described, decided to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for a fresh reconsideration, ensuring the petitioner is given a fair opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799400 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ARAVIND CHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: MALLAHAR RAO
• Keywords: Income Tax Returns; Notices; Quash; Reconsideration; Recovery proceedings; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of prohibition
• Section: OIO No.06/2022-23

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:34471 WP No. 17234 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 17234 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: GIRISH ARADHYA RUDRARADHYA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO,39,1ST FLOOR, 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560011 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRI MALLAHAR RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX VI DIVISION, OF CENTRAL TAX VI DIVISION, BENGALURU WEST COMMISSIONERATE 1ST FLOOR, BMTC BUS STAND, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU-560070 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARAVIND V. CHAVAN, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS ARISING PURSUANT TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN ORIGINAL, PASSED ON 05.09.2022, ISSUED ON 06.09.2022, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT, VIDE OIO NO.06/2022.23, BEARING DIN NO.20220957YU000000EAAO VIDE ANNX-C AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:34471 WP No. 17234 of 2024 ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the impugned order and recovery proceedings arising pursuant to the impugned order in original, passed on 05.09.2022, issued on 06.09.2022, issued by the respondent, vide OIO No.06/2022-23, bearing DIN No.20220957YUOOOOOOEAAO vide Annexure-C; (ii) Issue a writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ or order prohibiting the Respondent from initiating any proceedings pursuant to Order in original dated 05.09.2022, issued on 06.09.2022, issued by the 1st respondent, vide OIO No.06/2022-23, bearing DIN No.20220957YU000000EAAO vide Annexure-C; (iii) Grant such other orders of directions deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to the income tax returns filed by the petitioner for the tax period 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 05.09.2022, which is assailed in the present petition by the petitioner inter alia alleging that the notices preceding the impugned order had not been served upon - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:34471 WP No. 17234 of 2024 him, as a result of which the petitioner could not submit his responses, replies etc., nor contest the proceedings. It is submitted that if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent by providing one more opportunity to the petitioner, he would file his responses, replies etc., along with relevant documents and the respondent may be directed to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit replies to the notices preceding the impugned order was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, by adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply, responses, etc., along with relevant documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:34471 WP No. 17234 of 2024 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order at Annexure-C dated 05.09.20228/06.09.2022 is hereby set aside. iii. The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. iv. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, responses, documents etc., to the respondent, who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB/BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 "