SRI G RAJEEV vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/18787/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01024648201518 April 2016Bench: VINEET KOTHARI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in its order dated April 18, 2016, granted the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition with the liberty to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The Court granted this permission and accordingly dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the case concerning the alleged violation of Section 142(1) or the validity of the order under Section 143(3). The operative direction was to permit withdrawal and grant liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri. G. Rajeev, filed a Writ Petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition challenged an order passed by the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (R-2), under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated March 26, 2015. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents (Income Tax Officer, Assistant Commissioner, and Additional Commissioner) to provide an opportunity to present their case and comply with Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act by producing necessary documents before any action was taken pursuant to the order under Section 143(3). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner was denied a proper opportunity to present their case and produce necessary documents as required under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the order under Section 143(3) was passed by the respondent (Revenue)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that they were not given a fair chance to put forth their case and comply with the requirements of Section 142(1) by submitting necessary documents. They sought a direction for such an opportunity before the impugned order was finalized. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the Revenue. The matter was disposed of based on the petitioner's request.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL 2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

WRIT PETITION No.18787/2015(T-IT)

BETWEEN:

SRI.G.RAJEEV S/O GOVINDA RAJ AGED 48 YEARS R/O No.1101, 8TH CROSS, ASHOK NAGAR, BSK I STAGE, BANGALORE-560076.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI.MADHUKAR NADIG, ADV.)

AND:

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CIRCLE-5 (2)(3), 4TH FLOOR,

UNITY BUILDING, ANNEXE,

MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027.

2.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CIRCLE-5 (2)(3), 4TH FLOOR,

UNITY BUILDING, ANNEXE,

MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027.

3.

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

RANGE-5(2) (3) 4TH FLOOR,

UNITY BUILDING, ANNEXE,

MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO R1, R2 & R3 TO FIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE

2 PETITIONER TO PUT FORTH THEIR CASE AND COMPLIANCE OF SEC.142(1) BY PRODUCING THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BEFORE PROCEED TO TAKE ITS ACTIONS PER ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PASSED BY THE R- 2 ON 26.03.2015 (ANNEX-A).

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax.

2.

Permission is granted. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

Sd/- JUDGE

Srl.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →