MR. SHAIK MARKHOOM AHAMED V. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER

WP/24742/2023

AI Insights

In this case, the petitioner, Mr. Shaik Markhoom Ahamed, challenged several notices and an order issued by the Income Tax Department under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that the notices were not properly served, and he was not given an opportunity to respond, thus violating the principles of natural justice. The respondents argued that sufficient opportunity was provided. The court found that the details of the service of the notice were inadequately documented and, adopting a justice-oriented approach, set aside the orders and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 738044 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: KEERTHI D C
• Keywords: Income Tax; Natural Justice; Reconsideration; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 148A(b); 148A; 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:4312 WP No. 24742 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 24742 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: MR. SHAIK MARKHOOM AHAMED, S/O. MR. SHAIK NOOR MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, GROUND FLOOR, 1ST CROSS, BESIDE SARVODAYA PU COLLEGE, R.T. NAGAR, TUMUR - 572 103, KARNATAKA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KEERTHI PRASAD D.C, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA AND GOA, C.R. BUILDING, NO.1, QUEEN'S ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1 AND TPS, TUMAKURU, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, TUMAKURU - 572 105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 U/S 148(A) OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961 VIDE DIN NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050815167(1) DATED 15.03.2023 AT ANNEXURE-D TO THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:4312 WP No. 24742 of 2023 ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks for the following reliefs: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by respondent No.2 under Section 148(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide DIN NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050815167(1) dated: 15.03.2023 at Annexure-D to this writ petition in this interest of justice. b) Issue a writ of certiorari or in the nature of writ of certiorari or any other quashing the notice dated 10.02.2023 by the Respondent No.2 at Annexure-A vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A (SCN)/2022-23/1049628736(1) to this writ petition, in the interest of justice. c) Issue a writ of certiorari or in nature of writ of certiorari or any other order quashing the notice dated 02.03.32023 by the respondent No.2 at Annexure-B vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)2022-23/1050344721(1) to this writ petition, in the interest of justice. d) Issue a writ of certiorari or in nature of writ of certiorari or any other order quashing the notice dated 15.03.2023 by the respondent No.2 at Annexure-E vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1050815359(1) to this writ petition, in the interest of justice. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that the respondents issued a notices under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘IT Act') in relation to the Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner, did not submit any reply / response and subsequently, the respondents proceeded to pass the impugned order under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act, aggrieved - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:4312 WP No. 24742 of 2023 by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned order in order to point out that the details of service of the said notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act upon the petitioner are not contained in the impugned order, which does not state as to when and how the said notice was served upon the petitioner. In this context, it is contended that the notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act, was never served upon the petitioner who was not given any opportunity to file his response / reply to the said notice, whereby violating the principles of natural justice and consequently, the impugned order deserved to be set aside and the matter may be remitted back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that sufficient and reasonable opportunity had been provided to the petitioner who did not avail the same and as such, there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:4312 WP No. 24742 of 2023 6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a perusal of the impugned order, in particular paragraph No.5 would indicate that, except stating that notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act was issued, the respondents have not stated as to when and how the said notice had actually been served upon the petitioner. Further, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability to file a response / reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, by adopting a justice-oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply along with documents and contest the proceedings, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-D dated 15.03.2023 and remit the matter back to respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 7. In the result, I pass the following: O R D E R i The petition is hereby allowed. ii The impugned order dated 15.03.2023 vide DIN & Notice NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050815167(1) at - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:4312 WP No. 24742 of 2023 Annexure-D, the impugned order dated 10.02.2023 vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A (SCN)/2022- 23/1049628736(1) at Annexure-A, impugned order dated 02.03.2023 vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)2022-23/1050344721(1) and the impugned order dated 15.03.2023 vide DIN & notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1050815359(1) at Annexure-E are set aside and the matter remanded back to respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. iii Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit response / reply, documents, etc., under the notice dated 10.02.2023 issued under 148A(b) of the IT Act. iv Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the said reply, proceed from the stage of 148A(b) of the IT Act and pass appropriate orders after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE GJM/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23 CT: BHK "