SRI CHASALLI RAME GOWDA JAGADISH vs. ASSESSING OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/12631/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01021465202103 November 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the petition and set aside the impugned assessment order dated April 22, 2021. The Court found it to be an undisputed fact that the petitioner had not submitted a reply to the Section 142(1) notice. However, considering the petitioner's assertion that his inability to respond was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to grant one more opportunity. The matter was remitted back to the first respondent for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting the petitioner's reply to the Section 142(1) notice. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit additional pleadings and documents, and the respondent was directed to consider them and proceed further after providing a sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hearing him in accordance with law. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri Chasalli Rame Gowda Jagadish, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an assessment order dated April 22, 2021, passed by the Assessing Officer, National E-Assessment Centre (Respondent No. 1). The petitioner contended that he did not receive the notice issued by the respondents under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and was therefore unaware of it. Consequently, he could not submit a reply or necessary documents. The petitioner argued that his failure to respond was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, and he sought an opportunity to do so. The respondents argued that the petition had no merit and should be dismissed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated April 22, 2021, passed by the first respondent under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed on the ground that the petitioner did not receive the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act and consequently could not submit a reply? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that he did not receive the Section 142(1) notice and was unaware of it, leading to his inability to provide a response. This omission was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. He sought an opportunity to submit his reply and documents. Revenue's Contention: The respondents contended that there was no merit in the petition and it was liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44041 WP No. 12631 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 12631 OF 2021 (T-RES) BETWEEN:

SRI CHASALLI RAME GOWDA JAGADISH, S/O RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, SRI GURU TRANSPORT OPPOSITE WAREHOUSE, B M ROAD HASSAN - 573 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI G S NAGHARISH, ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NO.412-413, IST FLOOR, OPP METRO PILLAR NO.793, DWARKA MOR, NEW DELHI-110059.

2.

THE JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BELURU ROAD, HASSAN-573201.

3.

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NO.21/16, AYAAKAR BHAVAN, RESIDENCY ROAD, NAZARBAD, MYSURU-570010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E I SANMATHI AND SRI M DILIP, ADVOCATES)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.04.2021 ANNEXURE-G PASSED BY THE R1.

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44041 WP No. 12631 of 2021

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “ a) Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order dated Annexure-G bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/143 (3)/2021- 22/1032607558(1) passed by the first respondent. b) Issue such other Writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice issued by the respondents under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’), was not received by petitioner and he was not aware of the notice and consequently, petitioner could not submit its reply / response along with documents to the said notice. It is submitted that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit reply / response along

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44041 WP No. 12631 of 2021

with documents to the Section 142(1) notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and as such, if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner to do so by setting aside the impugned orders and notices, the petitioner would do so and respondents may be directed to proceed further in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that petitioner has not submitted reply / response along with documents to Section 142(1) notice. Under these circumstances, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit a reply along with documents to Section 142(1) notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and if one more opportunity is granted, petitioner would submit reply along with documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure–G dated 22.04.2021 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting of reply by the petitioner to Section 142(1) notice and to proceed further in accordance with law.

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44041 WP No. 12631 of 2021

6.

In the result, pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) Impugned order at Annexure-G dated 22.04.2021 is hereby set aside. (iii ) Matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of submitting of reply to the Show Cause Notice under Section 142(1) of the IT Act at Annexure –D dated 20.04.2021.

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., to the respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further by providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear him in accordance with law.

Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

CM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19

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 →