MURARI SUNDARSHANASETTY ARUNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/16052/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01030208202430 October 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, by adopting a justice-oriented approach, held that the impugned notices and the proceedings culminating in the impugned order deserved to be set aside. The Court found merit in the petitioner's grievance that the respondent passed the order under Section 148A(d) without affording the petitioner an opportunity to submit additional replies or documents. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated March 22, 2024, passed under Section 148A(d) and the subsequent notice dated March 22, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to allow the petitioner to file additional replies and documents to the notices dated January 17, 2024, and February 8, 2024, and thereafter, to proceed in accordance with law. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee should be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case, including additional submissions, before an order under Section 148A(d) is passed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Murari Sundarshanasetty Aruna, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging notices dated January 17, 2024, and February 8, 2024, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-2021. The petitioner also challenged the order dated March 22, 2024, passed under Section 148A(d) and the subsequent notice dated March 22, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Act, both by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kolar. The petitioner contended that the reply submitted to the Section 148A(b) notices was partial, and the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order before the petitioner could file additional replies or documents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices dated January 17, 2024, and February 8, 2024, issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-2021, and the subsequent order dated March 22, 2024, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, are liable to be quashed on the ground that the respondent prematurely passed the order without considering the petitioner's intended additional reply/documents? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on Section 148A). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the reply submitted to the Section 148A(b) notices was partial, and the respondent passed the impugned order under Section 148A(d) before the petitioner could submit additional replies or documents, thus violating principles of natural justice. The petitioner sought to quash the notices and the order. Revenue's Contention: The respondent-revenue contended that there was no merit in the petition and that it was liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: AND

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43445 WP No. 16052 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 16052 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: MURARI SUNDARSHANASETTY ARUNA W/O. K.V. PRABHAKARA GUPTA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO. 98-A, HALEPET BETHAMANGALA - 563 116 BANGARPET TQ KOLAR DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KASHINATH KALMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAMA MURTHY R., ADVOCATE) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, NEW EXTESNION KOLAR - 563 101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) *** THIS WRIT PETITIION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICES DATED 17.01.2024 AND 08.02.2024 ISSUED U/S 148A(b) OF THE ACT (ANNEXURE-A AND A-1) (ITBA/AST/F/17/2023- 24/1059793551(1) AND ITBA/AST/F/ 148A(SCN)/2023- 24/1060666644(1)) ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-2021 BY THE RESPONDENT, ETC. Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43445 WP No. 16052 of 2024

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- "A. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the Notices dated 17.01.2024 & 08.02.2024 issued u/s & A-1) (ITBA/AST/F/17/2023-148A(b) of the Act (Annexure-A 24/1059793551(1) & ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2023-24/1060666644(1)] issued for the assessment year 2020-2021 by the Respondent; and B. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 22.03.2024 made u/s 148A(d) of the Act, (Annexure-C) for the assessment year 2020-2021 [ITBA/AST/F/148A/2023-24/1063167411(1)] passed by the Respondent; and C. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act dated 22.03.2024 for the assessment year 2020-2021 (Annexure-D) (ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2023-24/1063168166(1)] issued by the Respondent; and D. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice, in the Petitioner's case."

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43445 WP No. 16052 of 2024 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 respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’) dated 17.01.2024 & 08.02.2024 were received by petitioner and filed the reply on 01.02.2024 and 16.02.2024 respectively. Further, the respondent passed an order dated 22.03.2024 under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reply submitted by the petitioner was partial in nature and before the petitioner could file its additional reply / documents, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition.

4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- revenue 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 the petitioner filed its reply dated 01.02.2024 and 16.02.2024 to the notices issued by the petitioner dated 17.01.2024 and 08.02.2024 and thereafter, the respondent passed the impugned order dated

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43445 WP No. 16052 of 2024 22.03.2024. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner intended to submit additional reply/documents to the aforesaid notice before which the respondent has passed the impugned order. Under these circumstances, by adopting a justice oriented approach, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned notices, proceedings culminating in the impugned penalty order deserves to be set aside and the petitioner be given another opportunity to file additional reply / documents to the aforesaid notices dated 17.01.2024 and 08.02.2024 and thereafter, the respondent shall consider the said reply / documents and proceed further in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The impugned order at Annexure-C dated 22.03.2024 passed by the respondent under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act and the subsequent notice at Annexure D dated 22.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, are hereby set aside.

- 5 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43445 WP No. 16052 of 2024 (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting additional reply to the notices dated 17.01.2024 and 08.02.2024 issued by the respondent. (iv) The respondent shall consider the said additional reply / documents filed by the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79/CT-SG

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →