BALAKRISHNA SANTOSH, vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP/20587/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01045528202608 July 2026Author: B M SHYAM PRASAD6 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition in part. It quashed the impugned Assessment Order dated 21.03.2026 and the Penalty Orders dated 21.03.2026. The Court reasoned that the petitioner had not received the Show Cause Notice due to an updated email ID, and therefore, he must be given another opportunity to respond. The Court found merit in the grievance regarding the lack of opportunity. The operative direction was to grant the petitioner liberty to file a response to the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026 as and when enabled by the authorities consequent to this order. All contentions were left open to be urged subject to the petitioner's response to the Show Cause Notice.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Balakrishna Santosh, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an Assessment Order dated 21.03.2026 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2024-25. The petitioner also challenged penalty orders dated 21.03.2026 passed under Sections 270A, 271AAC(1), and 272A(1)(d) of the Act. The petitioner's grievance was that he was not properly served with subsequent notices, including a Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026, despite having updated his email ID. The assessment order details a series of notices issued and the petitioner's compliance, or lack thereof.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessment Order and consequential penalty orders passed for Assessment Year 2024-25 are liable to be quashed on the ground of denial of opportunity to the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026, as per Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that he was not served with the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026 due to an updated email ID, which he had duly informed the authorities about. He contends that his belated response to a Section 142(1) notice was not considered solely on the grounds of being filed beyond the permitted time. The petitioner seeks an opportunity to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents accepted notice and was heard on the question of whether the proceedings could be restored with a further opportunity to the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 270A,Section 271AAC(1),Section 272A(1)(d),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 20587 OF 2026 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

1.

BALAKRISHNA SANTOSH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O L BALAKRISHNAMA NAIDU, NO.1564/A, 29TH CROSS, 28TH MAIN, BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560070. PAN: BMRP S1922F …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), BANGALORE 560001

2.

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI 110003 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DELIP, ADVOCATE ALONG WITH SRI. VINAYAK S PANDI, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) ISSUE

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B DATED 21/03/2026 BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2025- 26/1087710219(1) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024-25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A. II) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 274 R.W.S. 270A OF THE ACT DATED 21/03/2026 BEARING DIN ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2025-26/1087710253(1) BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024- 25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE A1. III) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271AAC(1) OF THE ACT DATED 21/03/2026 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC(1)/2025- 26/1087710254(1) BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024-25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A2. IV) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 272A(1)(D) OF THE ACT DATED 21/03/2026 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA /PNL/ S/ 272A/(1) (d)/25-26/1087709961(1) BY THE R2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 24-25 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNX-A3 V) AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner’s grievance is with the Assessment Order dated 21.03.2026 [Annexure-A] under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, [for short, 'the IT Act']. This impugned Assessment Order is for the assessment year 2024-25. The Assessment Order records the details of the notices sent to the petitioner and the details are as under.

Notice Date of notice Compliance date Respo nse Date of resp onse Resp onse Type Rem ark any Intimatio n 24.06.2025

Intima tion

143(2) 24.06.2025 09.07.2025 03.09.2025 18.09.2025 27.09.2025 04.10.2025 Letter issued 19.11.2025 5 days Centralis ed Communi cation Letter 21.11.2025 Immediately Show Cause 01.12.2025 11.12.2025

Notice (144) 06.12.2025 11.12.2025 Yes 26.12. 2025 30.01.2026 03.02.2026 SCN 03.03.2026 09.03.2026

2.

Mr. Ravi Shankar S V, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has filed response to the notice under Section 142(1) of the IT Act on 26.12.2025 within the time allowed, furnishing the details and the petitioner is not served with the subsequent notices, including the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026.

3.

In support of the petitioner's case for interference for restoration of the proceedings with opportunity to file reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026, Mr. Ravi Shankar S V submits that the petitioner in the interregnum had changed the e- mail ID and also updated the same but the petitioner is not served with the notices on such updated e-mail ID. The learned counsel seeks to elaborate on the merits of the additions on the allowances and the

disallowances made in the Assessment Order. However, Mr. M. Dilip, the learned Standing counsel who accepts notice for the respondents, is heard on whether the proceedings can be restored with a further opportunity to the petitioner.

4.

This Court must intervene on the lack of opportunity leaving open all contentions to be urged subject to the petitioner’s response to the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026. This Court is of this view because the petitioner has not received the Show Cause Notice in view of updating the e-mail ID, he must have another opportunity, especially when the belated reply is not considered only on the ground that it is filed beyond the permitted time, leaving open all grounds. In the light of the afore, the following.

ORDER

The petition is allowed in-part quashing the impugned Assessment Order [Annexure - A], Penalty Orders [Annexures -

A1 to A3] dated 21.03.2026 with liberty to the petitioner to file response to the Show Cause Notice dated 03.03.2026 as and when enabled by the Authorities consequent to this order.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →