MELAGANI CHICKAVENKATAPPA BHARGAVA RAM V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/24285/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Melagani Chickavenkatappa Bhargava Ram, the petitioner, who challenged the notices issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that he was not an assessee as he only had agricultural income and was unaware of the notices because he did not possess a PAN and the notices were only uploaded on the Department's web portal. The court found that the petitioner was not properly served with the notice and thus had no opportunity to respond or participate in the proceedings. The court's decision was influenced by a similar case involving the petitioner's brother, where the matter was remanded for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 671277 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.No.16733/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: R CHANDRASHEKAR; KASHINATH KALMATH
• Keywords: Agricultural income; Assessment Year; Exparte order; Notice; Web portal
• Section: 148A(b); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5152 WP No. 24285 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 24285 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: MELAGANI CHICKAVENKATAPPA BHARGAVA RAM S/O M C HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS MELAGANI, EMMANATHA POST MULBAGAL- 563131 KOLAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R CHANDRASHEKAR AND SRI KASHINATH KALMATH, ADVS. FOR SRI RAMA MURTHY R., ADV.) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.1, NEW EXTENSION KOLAR-563101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A). QUASHING THE NOTICES DATED 17.02.2023 AND 08.03.2023 ISSUED U/S 148A(B) OF THE ACT (ANNEXURE-B AND B-1) (ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022- 23/1049881963(1) AND ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/ 2022- 23/1050512852(1)) ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-2017 BY THE RESPONDENT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5152 WP No. 24285 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel Sri.R.Chandrashekar and Sri.Kashinath Kalmath for Sri.Ramamurthy.R., learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi., for respondent-Revenue. Perused the writ petition papers. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is before this Court questioning the order passed under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘1961 Act’) and consequential orders. Learned counsel would submit that impugned order is exparte order. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is not an assessee since he has only agricultural income. Though the notices appeared on the web portal of the Department, since the petitioner does not have PAN, it has not come to his notice. Thus, learned counsel would pray for an opportunity to participate in the proceedings initiated under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act (Annexure-B1). Learned counsel for the petitioner also - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5152 WP No. 24285 of 2024 places reliance on the order dated 24.07.2024 in W.P.No.16733/2024 wherein his brother has approached this Court for similar prayer, wherein this Court has remanded the matter for affording an opportunity to the petitioner therein. 3. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi for Revenue admits that it is an exparte order, but he submits that notice at Annexure-B1 issued under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act was uploaded on the web portal of the Department and prays for passing appropriate order. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that it is a case where the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to file his objections and to participate in the proceedings initiated under Section 148A of 1961 Act. Admittedly, the petitioner is not an assessee and he had no knowledge of the notice uploaded on the web portal of the Department. It is also noticed that except uploading the notice in the web portal, no - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5152 WP No. 24285 of 2024 individual notice is issued to the petitioner by the Department. The order under Clause(b) of Section 148A of 1961 Act is passed noting that the assessee has failed to disclose the nature and source for purchase of the immovable property. When the notice is not served on the petitioner, there was no occasion for the petitioner to appear and disclose his income. In the above circumstances, writ petition succeeds. Hence, the following: ORDER a) Annexure-C bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/ 2022-23/1051158989(1) dated23.03.2023; Annexure-D bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/ 2022-23/1051190878(1) dated 23.03.2022; and Annexure-E bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/147/ 2023-24/1061571959(1) dated 27.02.2024 are quashed. b) The matter is remanded back to the stage of notice under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5152 WP No. 24285 of 2024 the petitioner is granted two weeks time to file objections and the petitioner shall appear before the first respondent on 20.02.2025 at 11.00 a.m. Thereafter, respondents to proceed in accordance with law. c) With the above, writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 "