VEERASAGARA RANGAIAH RAMANNA V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/21078/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Veerasagara Rangaiah Ramanna, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(5), Bangalore. The petitioner sought to quash the acknowledgment letters issued by the second respondent and requested a refund of excess TDS amount claimed in the income tax returns for the relevant assessment years. The petitioner argued that their representations were not considered, leading to the issuance of non-speaking and cryptic orders. The respondents contended that the writ petition lacked merit. The High Court of Karnataka found in favor of the petitioner, citing violations of natural justice and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 693576 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2022
• 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: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: K MALHAR RAO
• Keywords: Natural Justice; Non-speaking orders; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus; Excess TDS Refund

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.21078 / 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: VEERASAGARA RANGAIAH RAMANNA S/O RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.21, SRIRAMANILAYA, MUNESHWARANAGARA, BANGALORE SOUTH, BANGALORE-560085, KARNATAKA. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. MALHAR RAO, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE-560002, KARNATAKA. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(2)(5), UNITY BUILDING, BANGALORE-560002. KARNATAKA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADV.,) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR OTHER QUASHING THE RESPONSE / ACKNOWLEDGMENT LETTERS ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-K 2 AND ANNEXURE-L OF THE WRIT PETITION; TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REFUND THE EXCESS TDS AMOUNT AS CLAIMED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ALONG WITH INTEREST AS APPLICABLE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER 1. In this writ petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: “i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or other quashing the response / acknowledgment letters issued by 2nd respondent vide ANNEXURE-K and ANNEXURE-L of the writ petition. ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the like nature of writ, directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation and direct the respondent authorities to refund the excess TDS amount as claimed by the petitioner in the return of income for the relevant assessment years along with interest as applicable. ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction in favour of the Petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of principles of natural justice.” 3 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the material on record discloses that the petitioner submitted representations at Annexure 'G' and 'H' along with all the relevant documents. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the submission of the aforesaid representations and documents by the petitioner, the respondents have proceeded to pass the impugned communication at Annexures 'K' and 'L' which are non- speaking orders and laconic, without properly considering the representations and without any application of mind and without assigning any reasons whatsoever as to why the requests made by the petitioner was being rejected and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present writ petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4 5. As rightly contended by the petitioner, a perusal of the impugned communication at Annexures 'K' and 'L' both dated 08.07.2021, will indicate that the representations and the documents submitted by the petitioner have not been considered by the and consequently, the impugned orders being un- reasoned, non-speaking, laconic, cryptic orders, without any application of mind and without proper and cogent reasons as to why the applications filed by the petitioner have been rejected, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned communication at Annexures 'K' and 'L' are violative of the principles of natural justice and the same deserve to be quashed and the matter remitted back to the respondents for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned communication at Annexures 'K' and 'L' both dated 08.07.2021, issued by respondent No.2, are hereby set aside. 5 (iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondents for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings, documents, etc., which shall be considered by the respondents, in accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE RK CT:AKR "