SRI RAJAGOPALAN VENKATARAMAN V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/17848/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Sri. Rajagopalan Venkataraman, represented by his power of attorney holder Mr. Phalguna B.N., who filed a writ petition against the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, challenging the rejection of his application for a NIL rate of TDS for the financial year 2021-22. The rejection was communicated via an email that did not provide any reasons for the decision, which the petitioner argued was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The court found the communication to be non-speaking, cryptic, and lacking in reasoning, thus quashing the order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 753942 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP; K S ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: ANNAMALAI
• Keywords: Natural Justice; Rejection of application; Speaking order; NIL rate of TDS; Cryptic communication
• Section: 197

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.17848 OF 2022(T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI. RAJAGOPALAN VENKATARAMAN, REPRESENTED BY HIS PWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MR. PHALGUNA B.N. S/O SRI. NANJUNDESHWARA B.N., AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT #16/1, 1ST FLOOR, BANASHANKRI II STAGE, BENGALURU- 560 070. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU- 560095. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1) (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION). BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR., SRI.K.S. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER REJECTING THE APPLICATION MADE FOR NIL RATE OF TDS AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 197 OF THE ACT REVISED VIDE EMAIL DATED 28.02.2022 ALONG WITH SCREENSHOT OF THE TRACES PORTAL EVIDENCING REJECTION OF APPLICATION, PASSED BY THE R2 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2021-2022 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2022-23 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. 2 THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 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 order rejecting the application made for NIL rate of TDS as per the provisions of section 197 of the Act received vide email dated 28.02.2022 along with screenshot of the TRACES portal evidencing rejection of application, passed by the Respondent No.2 for the Financial Year 2021-22 relevant to Assessment Year 2022-23 herein marked as ANNEXURE-A. b. Issue a writ of mandamus or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to pass a fresh speaking order in respect of the application made for NIL rate of TDS as per the provisions of Section 197 of the Act vide dated 14.12.2021 for the Financial Year relevant to Assessment year 2022-23. c. Issue a writ of Mandamus or direction in the nature of a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to furnish the reasons for rejection of the application filed for NIL rate of TDS vide Form 13 3 dated 14/12/2021 under Section 197 of the Act for the assessment year 2022-23. d. And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper 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. The material on record discloses that the application submitted by the petitioner seeking NIL TDS in terms of Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the I.T. Act”) has been rejected by the respondents by addressing a communication in this regard at Annexure-A dated 28.02.2022. It is the grievance of the petitioner that no separate order, much less any speaking order has been passed by the respondents and the attachment to the aforesaid communication only indicates that the claim of the petitioner has been summarily rejected and the same being violative of principles of natural justice, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4 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 learned counsel for the petitioner, the material on record discloses that except the impugned communication at Annexure-A dated 28.02.2022 enclosing a copy of the attachment, which discloses that the claim of the petitioner has been summarily and unilaterally rejected by the Assessing Officer without assigning any reasons, the impugned communication and order are clearly non-speaking, cryptic, unreasoned and laconic and passed without application of mind and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently, the same deserves to be quashed and the matter 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. 5 (ii) The impugned order dated 28.02.2022 and the impugned communication/e-mail along with the accompanying screen shot dated 28.02.2022 is hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to file additional pleadings documents etc., and shall also provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE Bmc "