SMT SANTHOSHI LAKSHMAN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/16543/2023

AI Insights

In this case, the petitioner, Smt. Santhoshi Lakshman, challenged the orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Officer under Sections 148 and 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner argued that there was no escapement of income chargeable to tax, and even if there was, it was less than Rs. 50 lakhs, citing the amended Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contended that the respondent did not consider her detailed response to the show cause notices, leading to an erroneous conclusion. The respondent opposed the petition, asserting it lacked merit. The court found that the respondent had not adequately considered the petitioner's submissions and thus decided to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748159 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Constitution of India, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: BALRAM RAO
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2016-17; Impugned order; Income escaping assessment; Reconsideration; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 148; 148A(d); 149(1)(b); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.16543 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SMT. SANTHOSHI LAKSHMAN, W/O N. LAKSHMAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT: NO.171, 3RD ‘A’ CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, KHB COLONY, 1ST STAGE, BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 079. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT. ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONERS CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER U/S 148A(d) OF THE ACT DTD 21.03.2023 IN DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051029189(1) ANNEXURE-E AND NOTICE DTD 21.03.2023 ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT HAVING DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051029453(1) (ANNEXURE-F) FOR Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 ISSUED / PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “ i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for records of the Petitioner’s case and after examining the legality and validity thereof be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated: 21.03.2023 in DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051029189(1) (ANNEXURE-E) and notice dated: 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act having DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051029453(1) (ANNEXURE- F) for the Assessment Year 2016-17 issued/passed by the Respondent, and ii) A writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondents by themselves, their subordinate, servants and agents to withdraw and cancel impugned order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated: 21.03.2023 in DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051029189(1) (ANNEXURE-E) and notice dated: 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 the Income Tax Act having DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051029453(1) (ANNEXURE- F) for the Assessment Year 2016-17 issued/passed by the Respondent, and iii) A writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondents by themselves, their subordinate, servants and agents from taking any action in furtherance or consequent to impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated: 21.03.2023 in DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051029189(1) (ANNEXURE-E) and notice dated: 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act having DIN and Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051029453(1) (ANNEXURE-F) for the Assessment Year 2016-17 issued/passed by the Respondent, and iv) Grant the interim relief in terms of prayer (iii) above, and v) Issue such other order, writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit; and vi) Direct the Respondents to pay the costs of this Writ Petition.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 for the petitioner submits that apart from the fact that there was no escapement of income chargeable to tax by the petitioner, even the alleged escapement was less than Rs.50 lakhs and in view of Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (after amendment) w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the impugned proceedings pursuant to the show cause notices dated 27.01.2023 and 07.03.2023 culminating in the impugned order dated 21.03.2023 were contrary to the provisions of Section 147 to 149 of the I.T. Act as well as the material on record and the same deserve to be quashed. It was submitted that though the petitioner had submitted a detailed response stating that the alleged income escaping assessment was less than Rs.50 lakhs, the respondent has not considered the same resulting in erroneous conclusion. It was also submitted that the petitioner intends to produce additional documents in support of his claim and as such, it is necessary that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent – revenue submits that there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that though the petitioner submitted detailed replies to the show cause notices, the respondent has not considered the various contentions urged by the petitioner while passing the impugned order. Further, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that if one more opportunity is provided, the petitioner would produce additional material to substantiate his claim, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order and notice both dated 21.03.2023 vide Annexures – E and F respectively passed / issued by the respondent are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of issuance of Notices under Section 148A(b) of the I.T.Act. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:3874 WP No. 16543 of 2023 (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., to the respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE SV/SRL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 56 "