Smt M.R. Rekha V. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Center and The Range, Circle-4(3), Income Tax Department

WP/5891/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Smt M.R. Rekha, the petitioner, who challenged a penalty order levied under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that she did not receive several notices related to the penalty, which led to an ex parte order being passed without her participation. The respondents argued that the petitioner was given sufficient opportunities to respond but failed to do so. The court, adopting a justice-oriented approach, set aside the penalty and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the petitioner to present her case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 687771 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, Section 271D of the Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: R CHANDRASHEKAR
• Keywords: Exparte order; Income Tax; Non-service of notices; Penalty; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 271D

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.5891 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SMT M.R. REKHA W/O. PRASAD K., AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.32, GANGADHARA NAGARA, 1ST CORSS, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, SARAKKI GATE, BANGALORE-560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, ROOM NO.245-A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE RANGE, CIRCLE-4(3), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KORAMANGALA BUS STAND, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 047. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF PENALTY DATED 08.02.2022 LEVIED U/S. 271D OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 VIDE ANNEXURE-G ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 2 ORDER In this petition, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs: a. A writ of certiorari or in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the order of penalty dated 08.02.2022 levied u/s. 271D of the Act for the assessment year 2017-18 (Annexure-G) issued by 1st respondent. b. Issue such other writ or writs or directions as this Hon’ble High Court deem fit, in facts and in the circumstances of Petitioner’s case, in the interest of justice. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the Memorandum of Petition and referring to the documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notices at Annexure-D dated 23.09.2021 and Annexure-E dated 21.12.2021 and Annexure-F dated 05.01.2022 were not served upon the petitioner and consequently, the petitioner was not in a position to submit reply along with documents 3 to the said notices and the proceedings have culminated into the impugned exparte order in the absence of the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is not merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that despite sufficient opportunity being granted in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner neither responded to the aforesaid notices nor contested the proceedings and as such, respondents were left with no option but to proceed with passing the impugned order, which does not warrant interference by this Court in the present petition. 5. Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims including service/non-service of notices, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to submit her reply along 4 with the documents to the aforesaid notices and hence, respondent No.1 proceeded to pass the impugned order, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the rival contentions and by adopting a justice oriented approach, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law, after permitting the petitioner to submit her response/reply to the aforesaid notices, which shall be considered by the respondents, in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order of penalty dated 08.02.2022 passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-G is hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 5 (iv) Petitioner is directed to furnish her reply/response along with all relevant documents to the aforesaid notices dated 23.09.2021, 21.12.2021 and 05.01.2022 at Annexures-D, E and F respectively, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (v) Upon petitioner submitting her reply along with documents as stated supra, respondent No.1 shall provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and proceed thereafter in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE Bmc "