M/s.Yeshodha Electrical Suppliers V. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-10(1) and The Commissioner of Income-tax Bangalore \\u2013 IV

WP/58831/2013

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Yeshodha Electrical Suppliers, represented by its partner Smt. L. Nirmala, who filed a Writ Petition against the reassessment order for the Assessment Year 2007-08 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The petitioner contested the validity of the notice under Section 148, claiming it was defective or not issued in accordance with the law. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore. The court's decision was influenced by the precedent set by the Supreme Court, which discourages the adjudication of such notices in writ proceedings if the petitioner has access to statutory appellate remedies.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 689541 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: GKN DRIVESHAFTS (INDIA) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, Section 148 of the Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: S PARTHASARATHI
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2007-08; Defective notice; Income Tax; Reassessment order; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 226; 227

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA WRIT PETITION NO.58831 OF 2013 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/s.Yeshodha Electrical Suppliers No.25, Y.No.8/2 Ambalipura Village Sarjapura Road Bangalore – 560 034 Represented by its Partner Smt.L.Nirmala D/o of Sri.Lakkanna Aged about 38 years. ... PETITIONER (By Shri.S.Parthasarathi, Advocate) AND: 1. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-10(1) Unity Building Annexe Mission road Bangalore – 560 027. 2. The Commissioner of Income-tax Bangalore – IV C.R.Building Queens Road Bangalore – 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (By Shri.K.V.Aravind, Standing Counsel for R1 & R2) 2 This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the reassessment order dated 25.3.2013 passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2007-08 by the R-1 vide Annexure-D and etc. This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following: O R D E R Assessment order dated 25.03.2013 is assailed in this Writ Petition. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents and perused the material on record. 3. During the course of submission, learned Counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice that the impugned order is a subject matter of the appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals). However, the very initiation of the proceedings by the issuance of notice under Section 148 is assailed by contending that the notice was 3 defective or in substance, no notice in accordance with law was issued to the assessee. 4. Be that as it may. As the petitioner has already availed of statutory appellate remedy, it would not be proper for this Court to interfere with the impugned assessment order in writ proceedings. In this context, it would be relevant to rely on the decision of the Honb’le Supreme Court in the case of GKN DRIVESHAFTS (INDIA) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. reported in (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that a notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act cannot be a subject matter of adjudication in writ proceedings. If the assessee has any grievance with regard to very issuance of the notice or there being initiation of proceedings in the absence of notice under Section 148 of the Act, then the proper course is to take those objections before the Assessing Authority or appellate authority as the case may be. 4 5. In the instant case, the petitioner has appeared before the Assessing Officer and thereafter, the impugned assessment order has been passed. 6. Be that as it may. Since the petitioner has already availed of the appellate remedy, all contentions with regard to issuance of defective notice, etc., is permitted to be taken by the petitioner before the appellate authority. With the aforesaid observations, Writ Petition stands disposed. As the appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), any protective orders that the petitioner intends to seek may be sought before that authority itself. Sd/- JUDGE Prs* "