GAURAKLARA SHIVAKUMAR NAMRATHA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT

PDF · subscribers
WP/11188/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01025029202601 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the impugned notices and orders. The Court found in favor of the petitioner based on the fact that the assessment year was 2015-16 and the notice under Section 148 of the Act was dated 29.03.2022, which is beyond 31.03.2021. The Court reiterated the Apex Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, as followed by this Court in WP No.20292/2023 and subsequently in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others vs Nehal Ashit Shah, which held that a notice under Section 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16 cannot be issued after 31.03.2021. The Court also noted that the proceedings were initiated for an alleged escaped income of Rs.40,00,000/-, which was below the statutory threshold. Consequently, the ex parte Assessment Order dated 24.03.2023, the Penalty Order dated 11.09.2023, and the notices under Section 148A(b), 148A(d), and 148 were quashed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gauraklara Shivakumar Namratha, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging several notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2015-16. These included a notice under Section 148A(b) dated 19.03.2022, an order under Section 148A(d) dated 29.03.2022, a notice under Section 148 dated 29.03.2022, an ex-parte assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 dated 24.03.2023, and an ex-parte penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) dated 11.09.2023. The revenue was represented by the Assessment Unit and the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hassan.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2015-16, dated 29.03.2022, is valid, given that it was issued after 31.03.2021? The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148, issued on 29.03.2022 for AY 2015-16, is invalid as it was issued after the stipulated date of 31.03.2021. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal and a High Court of Karnataka decision in W.P.No.20292/2023. The revenue, through its counsel, attempted to distinguish the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 144,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32832 WP No. 11188 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11188 OF 2026 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

GAURAKLARA SHIVAKUMAR NAMRATHA W/O. SHARATH H.P., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, NO.3267, CHANDANA, NEAR ADHIC HUCHANESIRI S. LAKSHMIPURA, ARASIKERE - 573103, HASSAN DISTRICT. NOW AT D-1, 402, L.AND T. SOUTH CITY, AREKERE, BANGALORE- 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. CHANDRASHEKAR AND SRI. KASHINATH KAMATH., ADVOCATES FOR SRI. R. RAMAMURTHY., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI-110 001. MINISTRY OF FINANCE.

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32832 WP No. 11188 of 2026

2.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AND TPS, AYAKAR BHAVAN, 2ND STAGE, BELURU ROAD, HASSAN-573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. THIRUMALESH., ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE NOTICE DATED 19-03-2022 ISSUED U/S.148A(B) OF THE ACT ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 IN DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1041027780(1) AS (ANNEXURE --A); B. QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 29- 03-2022 MADE U/S 148A(D) OF THE ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 ISSUED IN DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021-22/1041967332(1) AS ANNEXURE-B) BY THE 2 RESPONDENT; C. QUASHING THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S.148 OF THE ACT DATED 29-03-2022 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 (ANNEXURE-C) IN DIN NO. (ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2021-22/1041967563 (1)) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT; D. QUASHING THE EX- PARTY ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 24-03-2022 MADE U/S 147 R.W.S.144 R.W.S144 B OF THE ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 (ANNEXURE-F) DIN. NO. (ITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23 /1051285768(1)) PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT; E. QUASHING

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32832 WP No. 11188 of 2026

THE EX-PARTY ORDER OF PENALTY PASSED U/S.271(1)(C) DATED 11-09-2023 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 (ANNEXURE-H) IN DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(C)/2023-24/1055933568(1) PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

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 has called in question the Notice under Section 148A[b] of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [for short 'the Act'] dated 19.03.2022 [Annexure-A] while also calling in question the subsequent Notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-C]. The petitioner has also called in question the subsequent ex parte Assessment Order dated 24.03.2023 [Annexure-F]. However, Sri R. Rama Murthy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, presents a short ground for interference in asserting that the impugned

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32832 WP No. 11188 of 2026

proceedings are for the assessment year 2015-16 and that with the decision of the Apex Court in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal reported in [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC), a notice issued after 31.03.2021 would be saved. In fact, the learned counsel relies upon the decision of this Court in W.P.No.20292/2023. Sri M. Thirumalesh, the learned counsel for the Revenue, is heard, and the learned Standing Counsel proposes to make a distinction. This Court must favour the petitioner's case because the Assessment year is 2015-16 and the notice under Section 148 of the Act is dated 29.03.2022 and is issued beyond 31.03.2021. The Apex Court, as reiterated by this Court in WP No.20292/2023, in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal and subsequently followed in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others vs Nehal Ashit Shah [SLP (Civil) Diary No.(s)-57209/2024 dated 04.04.2025], has held that the notice Under

- 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32832 WP No. 11188 of 2026 Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2015- 16 cannot be after 31.03.2021. This Court must also observe that the proceedings are begun because there must be an addition towards income that has escaped tax in a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-, a sum below the statutory threshold. Hence the following ORDER The petition is allowed quashing the ex parte Assessment Order dated 24.03.2022 [Annexure- F] and the subsequent Penalty Order dated 11.09.2023 [Annexure-H] as also the Notices issued under Section 148 of the Act [Annexures - A, B and C]. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →