RAJYA VOKKALIGARA SANGHA V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/16297/2022

AI Insights

The case involves the Rajya Vokkiligara Sangha, represented by Mr. T Konappa Reddy, challenging the orders issued by the Income Tax Officer under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that their detailed reply to a show cause notice was not considered, leading to a violation of the principles of natural justice. The respondent's counsel contended that the petition lacked merit. The court found that the respondent did not consider the petitioner's reply, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 763029 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: NARENDRA J JAIN
• Keywords: Income Tax; Natural Justice; Reassessment notice; Show cause notice; Writ petition
• Section: 148; 148A(d); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.16297 OF 2022(T-IT) BETWEEN RAJYA VOKKALIGARA SANGHA (OF WHICH BANGLAORE INSTITUTE OF TECHONOLOGY IS A UNIT) K R ROAD, VIVESWARA PURAM BANGLAORE 560004 (REP BY MR T KONAPPA REDDY S/O MR THIPPI REDDY AGED 66 YEARS REGISTERED UNDER THE MYSORE SOCIETIES ACT 1904. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J JAIN,ADV.) AND THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2)(1), BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE 560095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV. ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/10424232239(1), DTD 01.04.2022 ISSUED BY THE LEARNED RESPONDENT U/S 148A(d) FOR AY 2018-19, ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-A. -2- THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: i. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari or otherwise the impugned order ITBA/AST/F/ 148A/ 2022-23/ 1042423239(1), dated 01.04.2022 issued by the learned respondent under Section 148A(d) for AY 2018-19, enclosed in Annexure-A. ii. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari or otherwise the impugned reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Act vide [ITBA/AST/S/ 148_1/2022- 23/1042424448(1), dated 01.04.2022 issued by the learned respondent for AY 2018-19, enclosed in Annexure-B. iii. Direct the learned Respondent to consider the submissions filed by the petitioner on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and iv. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble High Court may think fit including the cost of this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. -3- 3. The material on record discloses that in response to the show cause notice dated 21.03.2022 issued by respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the I.T.Act’), the petitioner submitted his reply dated 25.03.2022. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the petitioner submitting the detailed reply to the aforesaid show cause notice, the same has not been considered and the respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the I.T Act and issued the consequent notice under Section 148 of the I.T Act, which are violative of principles of natural justice and the same deserve to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the matter and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in response to aforesaid show cause notice dated 21.03.2022, the petitioner has submitted a detailed -4- reply dated 25.03.2022 and the same is produced as Annexure-F to the petition. However, a perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-A indicates that respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order without appreciating, adverting to or considering the aforesaid reply submitted by the petitioner and consequently, the impugned order passed by the respondent is erroneous, unsound and violative of principles of natural justice and same being contrary to material on record deserves to be quashed and the matter be remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned orders at Annexures-A and B both dated 01.04.2022 passed by the respondent are hereby set aside. -5- (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh of the claim of the petitioner to pass fresh orders under Section 148A(d) of the I.T Act in accordance with law after considering the submissions/reply, documents etc., submitted by the petitioner and after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. (iv) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- JUDGE KA/SRL "