Himalaya Wellness Company V. The Assessment Unit National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department

WP/4225/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Himalaya Wellness Company, which filed a writ petition against the final assessment order and demand notice issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department. The petitioner argued that due to a technical glitch in the ITBA portal, they were unable to e-file an acknowledged copy of their application in Form No. 35-A within the stipulated time, despite multiple attempts. The court found that the petitioner had filed the application manually on the last possible date and acknowledged the technical difficulties faced, leading to the decision to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the DRP for reconsideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799827 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: CHYTANYA KRISHNA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Demand notice; Dispute Resolution Panel; E-filing; Technical glitch; Writ petition
• Section: 143(3); 143(2); 144B; 144C(3); 92CA(2); 35-A

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 4225 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S HIMALAYA WELLNESS COMPANY (BEARING PAN AADFT3025B) MAKALI TUMKUR ROAD BENGALURU - 562162 (REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AND PARTNER REPRESENTATIVE SMT JAYASHREE ULLAL D/O SRI DAYANAND ULLAL AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS (REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT 1932) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHYTANYA.K.K, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. TATA KRISHNA.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT 2ND FLOOR, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM NEW DELHI - 110003 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.M.DILIP.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE THE IMPUGNED FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) RWS 144C(3) 144B BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023- Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 24/1059234454(1) DTD 31.12.2023 FOR AY 2021-22 ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition the petitioner seeks for quashing of the impugned order at Annexure A dated 31.12.2023 and consequent demand notice at Annexure B dated 31.12.2023 and for other reliefs. 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 15.03.2022, the petitioner e-filed its returns, pursuant to which notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the I.T.Act’) dated 28.06.2022 was issued by the respondent. Subsequently, the Transfer Pricing Officer issued notice on 03.11.2022 under Section 92CA(2) of the I.T.Act, to which the petitioner submitted its response on 07.12.2002, pursuant to which, the Transfer Pricing Officer has passed an order under Section - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 92CA(2) recommending certain adjustments. Thereafter, the respondent passed a draft assessment order on 30.11.2023, to which the petitioner filed a letter in the ITBA portal before the respondent stating that they will file an application under Section 35-A before the Dispute Resolution Panel ( for short ‘the DRP’) and requested to keep the demand and penalty proceedings in abeyance till disposal of the said application. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an application under Section 35-A of the I.T. Act on 29.12.2023 manually before the DRP as well as the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. However, on account of technical glitch in ITBA portal for the assessment year 2021-22, inspite of repeated attempts by the petitioner to e-file acknowledged copy of the application in Form No. 35-A of the I.T. Act during the period from 29.12.2023 to 31.12.2023 was not possible, as a result of which the respondent has passed the impugned final assessment order and issued consequent demand notice, which are assailed in the present petition. 4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned final assessment order and demand notice deserves to be set - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 aside and the matter may be remitted back to the respondent for re-consideration of the claim of the petitioner afresh by taking into consideration the application in Form No. 35-A of the I.T. Act filed by the petitioner and in accordance with law. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that since the petitioner had not e-filed acknowledged copy of the application in Form No. 35-A, respondent was left with no other option but to pass the impugned order, which does not warrant interference in the present petition. 6. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 29.12.2023 itself, the petitioner filed an application in form No. 35-A of the I.T. Act manually before the DRP as well as the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. However, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that due to technical glitches and on account of bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, petitioner could not e-file the acknowledged copy of the said application in Form No.35-A of the I.T. Act, despite repeated attempts between 29.12.2023 and 31.12.2023, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order deserves to be set aside and matter be remitted back to the respondent for - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 reconsideration afresh after necessary directions are issued by the DRP, pursuant to which, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 7. In the result, the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure A dated 31.12.2023 and consequent demand notice at Annexure B dated 31.12.2023 are hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) for reconsideration of the claim of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents etc., before the DRP, who shall consider the same and proceed further to issue directions after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with law. (v) Immediately upon receipt of directions by DRP, respondent herein shall provide sufficient and reasonable - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:12610 WP No. 4225 of 2024 opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE LRS/SRL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19 "