M/S DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

PDF · subscribers
WP/23917/2018HC KarnatakaKAHC01017443201818 February 2020Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ petition. The dismissal was not on the merits of the case but due to the non-compliance of office objections. The Court referred to a prior order dated August 8, 2019, which indicated the reason for the dismissal. Therefore, no finding was rendered on the substantive issues raised by the petitioner regarding the validity of the assessment order or the demand notice. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order of assessment passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 143(3) read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The petitioner also challenged the consequential demand notice issued by the respondent for the same assessment year. The writ petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The assessment order and demand notice were both dated December 29, 2016.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order of assessment passed by the respondent under Section 143(3) read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2014-15, and the consequential demand notice are liable to be quashed? The Petitioner's contention: The Petitioner sought to quash the impugned order of assessment and the consequential demand notice. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded in the judgment for the petitioner's case on merits. The Revenue's contention: The Revenue was represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded in the judgment for the revenue's case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO. 23917 OF 2018 (T-IT)

BETWEEN: M/S. DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: NO.180/780, YERANDHALLI VILLAGE JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BEHIND BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA BANGALORE-560 058. -REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. DEEPAK BETHALA S/O. PRAKASH BETHALA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARISH.V.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE (14) CR BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE-560 001. ...RESPONDENT

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S. 143(3) RAD WITH SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DTD. 29.12.2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.07, DTD. 29.12.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER The Writ Petition stands dismissed in view of the order dated 08.08.2019 for non-compliance of office objections.

Sd/- JUDGE

SSD

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →