Vaidehi Ranganath V. Income Tax Officer Intl. Taxation Ward 2(1) and Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation

WP/15068/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Vaidehi Ranganath, the petitioner, who challenged the validity of an order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148A(b) was sent to an incorrect email address, not belonging to her or her Chartered Accountant, and that she was unaware of the proceedings until they were initiated. The court found that the notice was not properly communicated, leading to a violation of natural justice, and thus set aside the subsequent proceedings, including the assessment order and related notices.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 796934 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR
• Keywords: Email Communication; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Non-Resident Indian; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 148A(b); 148A(d); 226

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:23295 WP No. 15068 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 15068 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: VAIDEHI RANGANATH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT C1101 VAISHANVI TERRACES APARTMENTS, DOLLARS COLONY, J.P. NAGAR, 4TH PHASE, BANGALORE-560078. …PETITIONER (BY MS. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER INTL. TAXATION WARD 2(1) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2024 BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/S/147/2024- 25/1064401794(1) (ANNEXURE-K) PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 144 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:23295 WP No. 15068 of 2024 ORDER The petitioner has called in question the validity of the order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'Act') for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The petitioner has submitted that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was sent to Email ID - [e-mail]. It is submitted that all the proceedings have been communicated only through email and that the Email ID to which, notice has been sent does not pertain to the petitioner or the Chartered Accountant. It is further submitted that the petitioner was a non-resident Indian and did not have to file returns and accordingly, there was no information available to the Income Tax Department as well regarding Email ID, to which communication could have been addressed. The petitioner further was not aware as to the source of information with the department regarding Email ID to which, communications have been sent by the department. It is submitted that subsequent to these proceedings have been initiated, the petitioner has registered herself on the online - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:23295 WP No. 15068 of 2024 portal as is evident at Annexure - A, in which, all details of communications have been furnished. In light of non-receipt of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, it is submitted that the proceedings have been proceeded ex-parte without any notice or participation of the petitioner. Accordingly, it is submitted that an opportunity may be granted. It is submitted that Email ID of the petitioner is '[e-mail]' to which, communications may have to be addressed in future as well. 3. Taking note of the assertion that notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act had been sent to an Email ID referred to above, which does not belonged to the petitioner and that the petitioner was not registered on the portal on the relevant date, the contention that there is non-communication of the notice under Section 148A(b) of Act requires acceptance. In light of the violation of principles of natural justice, the contention of prejudice as contended requires acceptance. If the proceedings under Section 148A(b) of the Act itself was not communicated, the entirety of consequential proceedings requires to be set aside to meet the ends of justice by affording an opportunity to the petitioner by relegating the matter back - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:23295 WP No. 15068 of 2024 to the concerned authority to the stage post notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. 4. In light of the same, the assessment order at Annexure - K, demand notice at Annexure - L, penalty notices at Annexures - M1, M2 and M3 as well as order under Section 148A(d) of the Act at Annexure - F and the notice under Section 148 of the Act at Annexure - G are set aside. 5. It is made clear that upon relegation of proceedings to respondent No.1, the petitioner to make out reply to Section 148A(b) notice. All contentions on merits are kept open. 6. The petitioner to appear before the assessing authority on 08.07.2024. The writ petition stands disposed off accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9 "