Yethivendra Naik V. National Faceless Assessment Centre and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)(1) Bengaluru

WP/22814/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Yethivendra Naik, the petitioner, who challenged several orders issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (respondent No.1) and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (respondent No.2) under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner sought to quash the digitally signed order of assessment, notices of demand, and penalty orders for the Assessment Year 2018-19, citing violations of natural justice as the primary ground. The petitioner argued that his requests for additional time to respond to a show cause notice were ignored, leading to the impugned orders. The court, after hearing the arguments, found merit in the petitioner's claims of procedural impropriety and set aside the contested orders, remitting the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 688087 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND; E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREEHARI
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Demand notice; Natural Justice; Penalty; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 143(3); 270A; 144B; 271AAC(1); 156

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 22814 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: YETHIVENDRA NAIK SON OF SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY NAIK AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.304, MONTREAL MANOR SHOPPING STREET SERPENTINE ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU-560020 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.146/8 SUPARTHA COURT, 5TH CROSS RAJMAHAL VILAS EXTENSION BENGALURU-560 080. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHREEHARI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE A CENTRE DESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR E –RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI-110003. REP BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NEAC) 2 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(2)(1) BENGALURU THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BMTC BUILDING 80FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V.ARAVIND ALONG WITH SRI. E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATES) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DIGITALLY SIGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 2 143(3) R.W.S. 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DTD 22.04.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 WHICH BEARS THE DIN VIZ., ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021- 22/1032615329(1) VIDE ANNX-A THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED order of assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22.04.2021 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1032615329(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-A. b. Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED notice of demand under section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22.04.2021 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1032615400(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-A1. c. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED order levying penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 3 12.01.2022 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2021- 22/1038673620(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-B. d. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of Certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 12.01.2022 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/PNL/S/156/2021- 22/1038673747(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-B1. e. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED order levying penalty under section 271AAC(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.02.2022 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/2021-22/1039450332(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-C. f. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the DIGITALLY SIGNED notice of demand under section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 05.02.2022 issued by the Respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 which bears the DIN viz., ITBA/PNL/S/156/2021- 4 22/1039450425(1) which is enclosed as Annexure-C1. g. And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. 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 despite the repeated request made by the petitioner to the respondents on 21.04.2021 to grant some more time to submit reply to the show cause notice issued by the respondent on 19.04.2021, the respondents have not considered the said request made by the petitioner and proceeded to pass the impugned assessment order, which is violative of principles of natural justice and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 5 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that though repeated request made by the petitioner to the respondents on 21.04.2021 seeking some more time to file reply and also for an opportunity of personal hearing as stated supra, was not considered by the respondents, who proceeded to pass the impugned assessment order, which is violative of principles of natural justice. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition by setting aside the impugned assessment order and by giving certain directions to the concerned respondents. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. 6 (ii) The impugned assessment order dated 22.04.2021 at Annexure-A, the impugned notice of demand dated 22.04.2021 at Annexure-A1, the impugned order levying penalty dated 12.01.2022 at Annexure-B, the impugned notice of demand dated 12.01.2022 at Annexure-B1, the impugned order levying penalty dated 06.02.2022 at Annexure-C and the impugned notice of demand dated 05.02.2022 at Annexure-C1 are hereby set aside (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to produce additional pleadings, documents etc., before respondent No.1, who in turn shall provide the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and proceed further in the matter. Sd/- JUDGE Bmc "