Sri Kidiyoor Survarna Vittalaksha S/o Muddappa V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and The Assessing Officer, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department, Office of the Income Tax Officer Ward No.1(2)(7)

WP/10299/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sri Kidiyoor Survarna Vittalaksha, the petitioner, who contested orders from the Income Tax Department regarding the Assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner initially faced an adverse order from the Assessing Officer, which was upheld by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner, due to unforeseen circumstances, failed to appear at the appellate proceedings, leading to the dismissal of his appeal. The petitioner sought judicial intervention under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, aiming to quash the appellate order and remand the case for a fresh hearing. The court found that the principles of natural justice were violated as the petitioner was not adequately notified about the appeal proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797482 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: BALARAJ
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Year 2017-18; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Opportunity of Hearing
• Section: CIT(A) Bengaluru - 1/10595/201920

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:16679 WP No. 10299 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 10299 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI KIDIYOOR SURVARNA VITTALAKSHA S/O MUDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.80, 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, INDUSTRIAL WORKERS LAYOUT, SAHAKARANAGARA BENGALURU - 560096. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALARAJ A C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI - 110 001. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.1(2)(7) BENGALURU AND OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. DILIP., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:16679 WP No. 10299 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.CIT(A) BENGALURU - 1/10595/201920 DT. 21/02/2024 PASSED BY THE R1 AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-D AND TO REMAND THE APPEAL BY DIRECTING THE R1 FOR PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PETITIONER AND FOR DISPOSAL ON MERITS AFRESH. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the 1st respondent – Appellate Authority, who confirmed the impugned order dated 28.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer and for other reliefs. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the 2nd respondent – Assessing Officer having initiated proceedings against the petitioner for the Assessment year 2017-18, the petitioner contested the proceedings, which culminated in the impugned order dated 28.12.2019 passed against the petitioner, whose appeal was also dismissed by the 1st respondent – Appellate Authority vide impugned order dated 21.02.2024. It is the grievance of the petitioner that due to bonafide reasons, - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:16679 WP No. 10299 of 2024 unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and without being properly intimated about the appeal proceedings, the petitioner could not appear before the 1st respondent, who noticed the absence of the petitioner and dismissed the appeal. It is submitted that if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent, petitioner would appear before the Appellate Authority, who may be directed to hear the petitioner / appellant and dispose of the appeal 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. A perusal of the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the 1st respondent – Appellate Authority will indicate that the petitioner was not notified about the appeal filed by the petitioner was migrated to the 1st respondent – National Faceless Appeals Centre and the absence of the petitioner / appellant has been noticed in the impugned order, which has been passed without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner thereby violating principles of natural justice warranting - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:16679 WP No. 10299 of 2024 interference by this Court in the present petition by setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter back to the 1st respondent – Appellate Authority for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the 1st respondent at Annexure-D is hereby set-aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent – Appellate Authority for consideration afresh, in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., before the 1st respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE AV / SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 "