SRI.SANGAYYA SHIVALINGAYYA SARAGANACHARI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP/112017/2019

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Sri. Sangayya Shivalingayya Saraganachari against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & TPS, Bagalkot, challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner argued that he was not given a proper opportunity to be heard before the assessment order was passed, as the notice was served only three days prior to the hearing date and was not received directly by him but by a family member. The respondent countered that previous notices were sent to the petitioner, who had sought adjournments. The court, considering the circumstances, decided to set aside the assessment order and provide a final opportunity for the petitioner to be heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 697142 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2019
• 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: Y V RAVIRAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: H R KAMBIYAVAR; PATRI K; ROOPA CHINIWAR
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Opportunity of Hearing; Writ petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.112017/2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI.SANGAYYA SHIVALINGAYYA SARAGANACHARI, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SECTOR NO.61, PLOT NO.M 101, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT-587103. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.,H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, SMT.PATRI SHASHIKALA K AND SMT.ROOPA S.CHINIWAR, ADVS.) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, BAGALKOT-587103. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.,Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEARING NO.APHPS0266C, ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1016318237(1) DATED 12.06.2019 FOR THE AY 2017-18, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. ii) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PETITIONER IN THIS MATTER IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL): The prayer in this writ petition is to set aside the order of assessment dated 12.06.2019 at Annexure-F. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a notice dated 07.06.2019 was served on a member of the family on 08.06.2019. In the notice, the date for hearing was fixed on 11.06.2019 and on 12.06.2019 the impugned order is passed. The learned counsel submits that it is evident from the material on record that an opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioner. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was not in station when notice was served on a member of the family. The petitioner was not aware that notice has been served and in fact the notice was served only three days prior to the date of hearing. It is therefore requested that the matter may be remanded to afford an 3 opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter the assessing authority may pass suitable orders. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit with reference to the assessment order that a notice was served on the petitioner on 16.01.2019 and the petitioner had sought for an adjournment and accordingly, the matter was adjourned. Thereafter, again notice dated 28.01.2019 was issued and there was no reply from the petitioner. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, on hearing the learned counsel and on perusing the writ papers, this Court is of the opinion that one final opportunity could be given to the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside while directing the petitioner to appear before the assessing authority on 18.11.2019 at 11.00 a.m. and make his submission before the assessing authority. 4 The assessing authority may consider the submission of the petitioner and thereafter proceed to pass the orders. 5. It is made clear that, if the authorities have recovered any amount from the petitioner consequent to the impugned order, the same shall remain in the hands of the respondent-authorities. In the final decision of the assessing authority, appropriate orders shall also be passed with respect to the amount that is already recovered. With the above observation, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE MBS "