M/S. RAGHAVENDRA GAS V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

WP/25779/2023

AI Insights

The case involves M/S Raghavendra Gas Agencies, represented by its proprietor Sri Narayan Pramod, who filed a writ petition against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru, and the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Mysore. The petitioner sought to quash an ex-parte assessment order and prevent further coercive actions based on that order. The petitioner argued that due to his father's ill-health, he was unable to provide necessary instructions to his Chartered Accountant, leading to the non-submission of required documents and responses, which resulted in the ex-parte order. The court, considering the circumstances and the petitioner's assertion of having a good case on merits, decided to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 744329 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: SRI SRI MALLAHAR RAO
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Certiorari; Certiorari; Ex-parte; Income Tax; Prohibition; Writ petition

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.25779 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S RAGHAVENDRA GAS AGENCIES MIG 17, MARUTI TEMPLE RAOD, GANGORTHRI LAYOUT MYSORE 570 009, KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI NARAYAN PRAMOD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRI MALLAHAR RAO.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU 4 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 095 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), MYSORE INCOME TAX OFFICE, 21/16, RESIDENCY ROAD, NAZARBAD, MYSURU 570 010, KARNATAKA …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 30.12.2019 VIDE REF.NO. ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ITBA.AST.S.144.2019-20/1023431151(1), PASSED BY R2 Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-C TO C2 ISSUE WRIT TO REFRAIN FROM ANY OTHER COERCIVE STEPS IN FURTHERANCE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY R2 DTD 30.12.2019 VIDE REF.NO.ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ITBA/AST/S/144/2019- 20/1023431151(1) VIDE ANNEXURE-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (i) Issue writ of certiorari or in the like nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 30.12.2019 vide ref no assessment order No.ITBA/AST/S/144/2019- 20/1023431151(1) passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure C to C2; (ii) Issue writ of prohibition, to refrain from any other coercive steps in furtherance of the assessment order passed by respondent No.2 dated 30.12.2019 vide ref no assessment order No.ITBA/AST/S/144/2019- 20/1023431151(1) vide Annexure-C to C2. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 that he had engaged the services of a Chartered Accountant for the purpose of submitting replies to the notices issued by the respondents. It is submitted that due to ill-health of the father of the petitioner, he could not provide necessary instructions to his Chartered Accountant, who also did not contact the petitioner nor informed him that replies along with documents had not been submitted to the said notices as a result of which the respondents proceeded further and passed the impugned ex-parte assessment order which is assailed in the present petition. It is submitted that the petitioner has a good case to urge on merits and the balance of convenience is in his favour and as such, if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned ex-parte assessment order and remitting the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh, the petitioner would submit his response / reply along with documents and contest the proceedings in accordance with law. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the respondents have passed the said ex-parte order by noticing that the petitioner had not submitted his response / reply to the notices issued by them. However, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that on account of non-providing of instructions to his Chartered Accountant due to the ill-health of his father, the petitioner could not submit replies along with documents due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to contest the proceedings and accordingly set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 6. However, it is to be stated that since indulgence is being shown in favour of the petitioner after a lapse of almost five years from the date of the impugned order, in the event, the second respondent passes an order against the petitioner after remand by virtue of this order, the second respondent would be entitled to claim applicable interest in accordance with law and in terms of the Notice of Demand dated 30.12.2019 [Annexure-C2]. 7. In the result, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 30.12.2019 [Annexure-C2] of the second respondent is hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the second respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:7046 WP No. 25779 of 2023 (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit his response / reply along with the documents to the second respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. (v) It is further directed that in the event, the second respondent does not accept the response / reply of the petitioner and passes an order against the petitioner, the second respondent would be entitled to claim applicable interest in accordance with law and in terms of the Notice of Demand dated 30.12.2019 [Annexure-C2]. SD/- JUDGE SA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 "