Ms. Sreenivasa Bhavana V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(2)(1), Bangalore and National Faceless Assessment Centre Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department, Delhi

WP/23066/2024

AI Insights

In this case, Ms. Sreenivasa Bhavana filed a writ petition against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the National Faceless Assessment Centre, challenging various show cause notices and an assessment order issued against her. The petitioner argued that the orders were unreasoned and that she was not given adequate opportunity to respond, which violated the principles of natural justice. The court examined the procedural aspects of how notices were served and whether the petitioner was given a fair chance to contest the allegations. The court's decision emphasized the importance of adhering to natural justice in administrative proceedings, particularly in tax assessments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 795454 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: ALOK MADAPPA; MARIA JOSEPH
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Show cause notice; Writ petition
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 23066 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: MS. SREENIVASA BHAVANA, D/O NARAYANASETTY SRINIVASA, AGED BOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING NO. 208, 2ND MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE KARNATAKA-560 086. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ALOK MADAPPA, ADVOCATE AND SMT.MARIA JOSEPH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(2)(1), BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA-560 095. 2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI – 110 001. REP BY INCOEM TAX OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED. 11.01.2022 BEARING NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/2021-22/1038606216(1) (ANNEXURE-A) ISSUED BY R-2 AND QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED. 17.08.2021 BEARING NO. ITBA/PNL/F/17/2021-22/1034936125(1) (ANNEXURE-B) ISSUED BY R-2 AND ETC. Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “I. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order dated 11.01.2022 bearing No. ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/2021-22/1038606216(1) (ANNEXURE-A) issued by Respondent No.2. II. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the Show Cause Notice dated 17.08.2021 bearing No. ITBA/PNL/F/17/2021- 22/1034936125(1) (ANNEXURE-B) issued by Respondent No.2. iii. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing Show Cause Notice dated 23.02.2021 bearing NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/2020- 21/1030893177(1) (ANNEXURE-C) issued by Respondent No.2. iv. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing Assessment Order bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1020516732(1) dated 15.11.2019 (ANNEXURE-D) issued by Respondent No.2. v. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing Show Cause Notice dated 17.10.2019 bearing No. ITBA/AST/F/143(3)(SCN)/2019- - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 20/1019024858(1) (ANNEXURE-E) issued by Respondent No.1. vi. Issue as Writ / Direction / Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing Show Cause Notice dated 10.09.2019 bearing No. ITBA/AST/F/143(3)(SCN)/2019-20/ 1017879612(1) (ANNEXURE-F) issued by Respondent No.1. vii. Issue as Writ / Direction/ Order in the nature of Certiorari, quashing Show Cause Notice dated 14.08.2019 bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/143(3)(SCN)/2019-20/1017404022 (1) (ANNEXURE-G); issued by Respondent No.1. viii. Pass such other or further order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice and equity.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner 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 invited my attention to the impugned order in order to point out that apart from the fact that the same is an unreasoned and non-speaking order, the details as regards how and when the notices dated 08.01.2019, 29.07.2019 and 29.07.2019 under Section 142[1] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 short, ‘the Act’] were allegedly served upon the petitioner are conspicuously absent in the impugned order and the second respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply along with the documents thereby violating principles of natural justice, and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking to unconditionally withdraw the appeal filed by him before the First appellate Authority in relation to the impugned order. 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the second respondent has not stated the details as to the service of notice upon the petitioner or as to whether the same was uploaded on the portal or sent to the registered e-mail ID of the petitioner. In the paragraph-4 of the impugned order, except stating that notices under section 142[1] of the Act were issued to the petitioner, the second respondent has not stated as to when the said notice were delivered/served upon the petitioner. 6. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned notice, proceedings culminating in the - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 impugned order cannot be said to have been done after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice and consequently, the impugned order deserves to be set aside by adopting justice oriented approach and to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply to the said notices under Section 142 of the Act and with a direction to the respondents to proceed further in accordance with law. However, it is to be stated that since indulgence is being shown in favour of the petitioner after a lapse of almost four 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 interest on the amount in terms of the Notice of Demand dated 15.11.2019 [Annexure-M]. 7. In the result, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is hereby allowed. [b] The impugned Assessment order dated 15.11.2019 [Annexure-M] of the second respondent is hereby set aside. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:34900 WP No. 23066 of 2024 [c] The matter is remitted back to the second respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. [d] 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. [e] 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 interest on the amount in terms of the Notice of Demand dated 28.06.2019 [Annexure-J]. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58 "