The Income Tax Officer Ward-1 and TPS, Office of the Income Tax Aayakar Bhavan Ramakrishnanagar Kunigal Road, Ramakrishna Nagar Tumkur, Karnataka-572103 and National Faceless Assessment Centre Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer Income Tax Department Ministry of Finance Room No.401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Delhi-110003 V. Begur Sinappa Venkatesh

WA/568/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer and the National Faceless Assessment Centre against the decision of a learned Single Judge, which quashed a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice was challenged on the grounds that it was not signed by the competent authority. The High Court of Karnataka, in a bench comprising Justice S.G. Pandit and Justice K.V. Aravind, decided the appeal by referencing a previous judgment by the same bench, which had addressed similar issues. The court found no grounds to deviate from the established precedent and thus disposed of the appeal accordingly.

• Counselvise Citation: [] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832430 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2026
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ITA.No.261/2021 C/w. ITA.No.264/2021
• Laws Referred To: Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAVISHANKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SANMATHI
• Keywords: Competent authority; Income Tax; Notice quashed; Writ Appeal
• Section: 4; 148A(b)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2919-DB WA No. 568 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL NO.568 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 AND TPS, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN RAMAKRISHNANAGAR KUNIGAL ROAD, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR TUMKUR, KARNATAKA-572103. 2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI-110003. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E. I., ADV.) AND: BEGUR SINAPPA VENKATESH OPP: KAMANNA TEMPLE KUNIGAL, KOTE-572130 ALSO AT BEGAUR SINAPPA VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O SRI.SEENAPPA, R/AT NEAR GOVERNMENT SCHOOL, BEGUR, KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DIST.-572130. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S. V., ADV.) Printed from counselvise.com Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2919-DB WA No. 568 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO I) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16/11/2023 IN WP NO.20807/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND II) GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) This appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 is directed against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 16.11.2023 in W.P.No.20807/2023 whereunder the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) and further proceedings, solely on the ground that Section 148A(b) notice is not signed by the competent authority. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi for appellants/Revenue and learned counsel Sri.Ravi Printed from counselvise.com - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2919-DB WA No. 568 of 2024 Shankar.S.V., for respondent. Perused the entire appeal papers. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent Sri.Ravi Shankar.S.V., would submit that the grounds raised herein are answered by the very same bench in judgment dated 24.09.2025 in ITA.No.261/2021 C/w. ITA.No.264/2021. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/Revenue is not in a position to dispute the same. 5. In the light of the above, the present appeal stands disposed of in the same terms of judgment dated 24.09.2025 in ITA.No.261/2021 and ITA.No.264/2021. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 Printed from counselvise.com "