SRI YUVARAJ V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/26051/2023

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Sri Yuvaraj against the orders passed by the Income Tax authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner challenged an ex parte order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, which was based on the petitioner's failure to respond to a notice under Section 142(1) of the Act. The petitioner argued that due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances, he was unable to submit a reply or participate in the proceedings. The court, considering the principles of natural justice and the specific circumstances cited by the petitioner, decided to quash the impugned order and remand the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748194 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: MALLAHA K
• Keywords: Ex parte order; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Reconsideration; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 144; 142(1); 226; 227

Judgement Text

"- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:2900 WP No. 26051 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 26051 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI YUVARAJ AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS VYBHAVA LAKSHMI NO.161, 8TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS, 14TH BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI BENGALURU – 560 071 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRI MALLAHA RAO K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OF KARNATAKA AND GOA QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4) BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 30.03.2023 PASSED IN BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23/1051665430 (1) PASSED BY R-2 Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:2900 WP No. 26051 of 2023 VIDE ANNX-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REFRAIN FROM FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF THE ORDER DTD 29.09.2023 PASSED IN ORDER BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1) (C)/2023-24/1056662818(1) PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNX-B AND ORDER DTD 29.09.2023 PASSED IN ORDER BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(C)/2023-04/1056662828 (1) PASSED BY R- 2 VIDE ANNX-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER This petition is directed against the impugned order dated 30.03.2023 vide Annexure-A passed by the respondent No.2 under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, ‘the Act’]. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record discloses that the petitioner is an individual assessee who filed return of income for the assessment year 2016-17. Pursuant to the - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:2900 WP No. 26051 of 2023 impugned proceedings, the respondents are said to have issued notice under Section 142[1] of the Act and since the petitioner had not submitted any reply to the said notice/show cause notice, the respondents proceeded to pass the impugned ex parte order, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition. 4. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the respondents have come to the conclusion that principles of natural justice had been complied with since sufficient and reasonable opportunity had been provided to the petitioner prior to passing the impugned order. However, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to submit reply along with the documents to the notice/show cause notice and participate in the proceedings in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner and by adopting justice oriented approach, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order, remand the matter back to the respondent for - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:2900 WP No. 26051 of 2023 reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. In the result, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is hereby allowed. [b] The impugned order dated 30.03.2023 [Annexure-A] of the respondent No.2 is hereby quashed. [c] The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. [d] Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit his reply, documents etc., before the respondent No.2, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Sd/- JUDGE AN/- "