M/S ENPHINTI ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/27448/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01006361201617 August 2016Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, while considering the writ petition, granted two weeks' time to the petitioner to comply with office objections finally. The Court ordered that failing compliance with the office objections within the stipulated period, the petition would stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. The Court dispensed with the production of the English translation copy of the documents. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the assessment order or the demand notice, nor does it provide any findings on the issues raised by the petitioner. The operative direction is conditional on the compliance with office objections.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Enphinti Engineering Solutions Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition sought to quash the assessment order passed by the respondent, the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(4), under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, dated March 15, 2016, for the assessment year 2013-14. Additionally, the petitioner sought to quash the consequential notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, also dated March 15, 2016, for the same assessment year. The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. The case was listed for orders on August 17, 2016.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed by the respondent under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, dated March 15, 2016, for the assessment year 2013-14, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law) 2. Whether the consequential notice of demand issued by the respondent under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, dated March 15, 2016, for the assessment year 2013-14, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law) The petitioner argued for the quashing of the assessment order and the demand notice. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY

WRIT PETITION No. 27448/2016 (T-IT)

BETWEEN

M/s Enphinti Engineering Solutions Pvt. Ltd., A company incorporated under the companies Act 1956 No.20, 2nd Floor, 1st Cross, Sampige Road, Malleswaram, Bangalore - 560003 Represented by its Director Mr. Anantha Chandrashekera Hebbale, S/o Mr. Chandrashekera Srinivasiah Hebbale Aged about 42 years

... PETITIONER

(By Sri./Smt : DNS LAW HOUSE, HARISH V.S., Advocate)

AND

The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1) (4), Room No.207, 2nd Floor, BMTC Building, 80 Feet Road, Koramangala 6th Block Bangalore - 560095

... RESPONDENT

W.P No. 27448/2016 2

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned assessment order passed by the respondent u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, dated: 15.03.2016 for the assessment year 2013-14 i.e., Annexure-J and the consequential notice of demand issued by the respondent u/s 156 of the Income Tax Act, for the assessment year 2013-14, dated: 15.03.2016 i.e., Annexure-K.

This Writ Petition coming on for orders on this day the court made the following order.

O R D E R

Production of English translation copy is dispensed with. Two weeks time is granted to comply with office objections finally, failing which, petition stands dismissed without further reference to Bench.

Sd/- JUDGE

T By : JAY

C By : R R By : JAY

COPY Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 156

All 694 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →