SRI K V MADHUSUDHAN KARTHIK V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/22218/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Sri K V Madhusudhan Karthik, the petitioner, challenging an exparte assessment order and a subsequent notice issued by the Income Tax Officer under the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner contended that the show-cause notice was not served, preventing him from submitting a reply, which led to the exparte order. The court found that the principles of natural justice were violated as the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to respond before the assessment order was passed. Consequently, the court set aside the order and notice, remitting the matter back for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 766793 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: VANI
• Keywords: Exparte assessment order; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 148; 142(1); 148A(d); 226; 227

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.22218 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI K V MADHUSUDHAN KARTHIK S/O SRI VENKATRAMANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT PLOT NO.98W/2, 2ND PHASE, JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, JIGANI, BANGALORE-562 106. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANI.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2)(3), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. 2 . ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021-22/1042320331 (1) DATED 31.03.2022 PASSED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION 148A(d) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 2 ORDER In this petition, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari to set aside the order bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021-22/1042320331(1) dated 31.3.2022 passed by the first respondent under Section 148A (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of assessment year 2015-16 vide Annexure- A, b. Issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari setting aside the notice bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/148-1/2021-22/1042334455(1) dated 31.3.2022 issued/passed by the first Respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the assessment year 2015-16 vide Annexure-B. c. Issue a writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to afford reasonable opportunity and to consider the reply to be filed by the Petitioner before passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act; d. Issue such other order and further reliefs as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3 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 show-cause notice dated 21.03.2022 under Section 148- A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the I.T. Act”), wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner should file reply on or before 28.03.2022. It is submitted that the said show-cause notice was not served upon the petitioner and hence, the petitioner could not submit his reply and thereafter, respondent No.1 proceeded to pass the impugned exparte assessment order under Section 148- A(d) of the I.T. Act on 31.03.2022 and further, respondent No.1 issued another notice dated 28.10.2022 under Section 142(1) of the I.T. Act to the petitioner to submit the details called for in the notice, to which the petitioner filed a requisition dated 03.11.2022 through e-filing portal requesting the respondent to furnish reasons recorded so that the petitioner would submit a detailed reply. It is submitted that the respondent sent a reply stating that the reasons recorded in the impugned assessment order dated 4 31.03.2022 shall be treated as reasons for issuing notice dated 28.10.2022, which is violative of principles of natural justice and the impugned assessment order deserves to be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, despite the alleged notice dated 21.03.2022, wherein only seven days time was granted to the petitioner to file a reply, was said to have not been served upon the petitioner, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned exparte assessment order, which was followed by issuance of the impugned notice dated 28.10.2022 to the petitioner and that respondent No.1 has not considered the reply filed by the petitioner, which is violative of principles of natural justice and consequently, the impugned exparte assessment order deserves to be set aside and the matter 5 be remitted back to the concerned 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 31.03.2022 at Annexure-A and the impugned notice dated 31.03.2022 at Annexure-B issued by respondent No.1 are hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law after providing sufficient opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner; respondent is directed to proceed from the stage of Section 148-A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, representation, relevant documents etc., to the notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Income Tax Act,1961, which in turn shall be 6 considered by respondent No.1 and respondent No.1 shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE Bmc "