SMT. SAROJAMMA KADIRI V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/14622/2022

AI Insights

In this case, Smt. Sarojamma Kadiri, the proprietrix of Sri SBMS Concrete, filed a writ petition against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, challenging notices and an order issued for the assessment year 2018-19 under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contended that the respondent had not provided sufficient opportunity to respond to the notices, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, noting that the respondent had proceeded to pass the order and issue notices without allowing adequate time for the petitioner to respond, despite her requests for extension.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 693787 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: ANNAMALAI
• Keywords: Income Tax; Natural Justice; Notice Quashing; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 148; 148A(b); 148A(d)

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.14622 OF 2022(T-IT) BETWEEN: SMT. SAROJAMMA KADIRI PROPRIETRIX SRI SBMS CONCERETE W/O SRI. VENKATESWARALU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 42-89-D, BOSE NAGAR RAYACHTY,KADABA 516269 ANDHRA PRADESH PAN DKBPK6411D PRESENTLY R/AT 4, GATEWAY PARK NALLURHALLI, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU 560 066 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI.S., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), C.R. BUILDING III FLOOR, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001 …RESPONDENT (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 NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148A(b) OF THE ACT, 1961 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1040496154(1) DTD 09.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE- A1. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 2 ORDER In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Act dated 09/03/2022 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/104049 6154(1) issued by the Respondent for the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A1. b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 08/04/2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1042655438(1) issued by the Respondent for the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A2. c) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 08/04/2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1042655645(1) issued by the Respondent for the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A3. d) And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. 3 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent 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 invites my attention to the notice dated 09.03.2022 issued by the respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the I.T. Act”) in order to contend that on 17.03.2022, petitioner sought for some time to submit his reply, subsequent to which the respondent issued one more notice on 27.03.2022, to which the petitioner filed reply and requested some more time to file his reply/response along with documents to the aforesaid notice under Section 148(A)(b) of the I.T. Act. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the requests made by the petitioner for some more time to submit his reply, the respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order under Section 148(A)(d) of the I.T. Act 4 without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. The material on record discloses that on 04.04.2022, the petitioner addressed a letter to the respondent specifically intimating him that since they were busy with I.T. filings, it was unable to gather required information and documents from multiple sources in time and requested the respondent to grant one month’s time to provide the reply and documents. Despite the said request made by the petitioner, the respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order on 08.04.2022 within a period of four days from the date of the request made by the petitioner and consequently, the impugned order being violative of principles of natural justice and adopting a justice oriented approach in the matter and to provide on 5 more opportunity to the petitioner to submit her reply and documents to the notice under Section 148A(b), I deem just and appropriate to quash the impugned order under Section 148A(d) and the impugned notice dated 08.04.2022 issued under Section 148 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) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 08.04.2022 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well as the impugned notice dated 08.04.2022 issued under Section 148 of the I.T. Act issued by the respondent vide Annexures-A2 and A3 respectively, are hereby quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to furnish his reply, documents etc., to the 6 notice under Section 148A(b) issued by the respondent and after hearing the petitioner in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE Bmc "