ITTINA INFRA-TECH LIMITED V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/13329/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Ittina Infra-Tech Limited, which filed a writ petition against various income tax authorities challenging the orders related to the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The petitioner sought to quash the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, citing inability to prosecute the appeals due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The court, considering the payments made by the petitioner and the cited precedent, decided to set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back for fresh consideration without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 758409 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: D. Komalakshi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax \\ ILR 2007 KAR 898
• Laws Referred To: Income-Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: A SHANKAR
• Keywords: Assessment years; Income Tax; Quashing of order; Reconsideration; Writ petition
• Section: 226; 227

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.13329 OF 2022(T-IT) BETWEEN: ITTINA INFRA-TECH LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 NO.1054, 7TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT DIRECTOR, MR MANU I TTINA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SANDEEP HULIGOL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095. 2 . THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095. 3 . THE COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-VI BANGALORE NO.324, CR BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560 001. 4 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) MYSORE, NO.55/1, SHILPASHREE VIDYARANYA COMPLEX VISHVESHWARANAGAR MYSORE-570 008. 2 5 . INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DEPUTY REGISTRAR NO.51, BEHIND JAL BHAWAN 1ST CROSS, 4TH T BLOCK TILAK NAGAR, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560 041. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMMON ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22.02.2013 BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, BANGALORE IN THE PETITIONERS APPEALS BEARING ITA NOS.1463 AND 464/BANG/2010 UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08 ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 16.08.2010 passed by respondent No.3-Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 22.02.2013 passed by the respondent No.5-Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and for other reliefs. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3 3. The material on record discloses that though several contentions have been urged by both sides, in support of their respective claims, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that it could not prosecute the appeals before respondent Nos.3 to 5 due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and in view of the payments having been made by the petitioner subsequently as can be seen from the payment challans at Annexures-V1 and V2 and in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of D. Komalakshi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – ILR 2007 KAR 898, in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner by adopting justice oriented approach, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and proper to set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back to respondent Nos.3 and 4 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 4. In the result, I pass the following: 4 ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-B dated 16.08.2010 passed by respondent No.3-Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 22.02.2013 passed by the respondent No.5-Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondents Nos.3 and 4 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings documents etc., to the said respondents, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. (v) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- JUDGE SV "