SATHYAPRAKASH PRADEEP KUMAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/17873/2022HC KarnatakaKAHC01041036202228 August 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka held that the impugned show cause notice issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, which was found to be outside the scope of Section 151A of the Act, stood obliterated. Consequently, all further proceedings initiated pursuant to that notice, and challenged in the present petition, were quashed. The court granted liberty to the respondents (revenue) to revive the petition in the event the Apex Court rules in favour of the Revenue in a pending matter before it. To this extent, the petition was allowed. The court also stated that the contentions of both parties, except for the issue noted, would remain open to be considered if the revival of the petition became necessary. The specific reasoning for the notice being outside the scope of Section 151A was not detailed in this excerpt but was based on a prior judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sathyaprakash Pradeep Kumar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging notices and an order issued by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year in question is 2017-18. The petitioner sought to quash a notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated May 24, 2022, an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated July 29, 2022, and a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated July 29, 2022. The petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated May 24, 2022, is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated July 29, 2022, is liable to be quashed? 3. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated July 29, 2022, is liable to be quashed? The petitioner argued for the quashing of the impugned notices and order. The revenue, represented by its counsel, did not present specific arguments in the judgment, but the court noted that the grounds projected in the petition were identical to those considered in a previous, connected matter (W.P.No.28182/2024 and connected matters) disposed of on August 28, 2025. The court's decision was based on the applicability of the reasons rendered in that prior judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 151A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38901 WP No. 17873 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.17873 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

SATHYAPRAKASH PRADEEP KUMAR S/O V. SATHYAPRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT #174/18, SURYA, 13TH CROSS, GIRINAGAR 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 004. PAN: ADKPK6124C. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2)(1), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095.

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38901 WP No. 17873 of 2022

2.

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGLAORE 3, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148A(b) OF THE ACT DATED 24.05.2022 BEARING DIN & LETTER NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1043142756(1) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017- 18 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 AND ETC

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

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38901 WP No. 17873 of 2022

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Act dated 24/05/2022 bearing DIN & Letter No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1043142756(1) issued by the Respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2017-18 herein marked as Annexure - A1.

ii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 29/07/2022 passed under section 148A(d) of the Act bearing DIN & Order No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044314980(1) issued by the Respondent No. 1 for the assessment year 2017-18 herein marked as Annexure - A2.

iii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 29/07/2022 issued under section 148 of the Act bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/M/148_1/2022- 23/1044345139(1) issued by the Respondent No. 1 for the assessment year 2017-18 herein marked as Annexure - A3.

iv) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.”

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38901 WP No. 17873 of 2022

2.

Heard Sri Annamalai S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The grounds projected in the subject petition in support of the prayer quoted supra are identical to the ones considered by this Court in W.P.No.28182/2024 and connected matters, disposed on 28.08.2025. 4. In the light of the issue being similar and the reasons rendered therein becomes applicable to the case at hand, the petition deserves to be disposed on the same lines. Therefore, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The impugned show cause notice issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer outside the scope of Section 151A of the Act stand obliterated. All further proceedings initiated thereto, challenged in this petition would stand quashed. (ii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents - revenue to revive the petition in the event, the Apex Court would hold in favour of the Revenue in the matter pending before it.

- 5 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38901 WP No. 17873 of 2022

(iii) With the aforesaid liberty and to the aforesaid extent, the petition is allowed. (iv) Contentions of both the parties except the one noted hereinabove, shall remain open to be considered in the event revival of this petition would become necessary.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 290

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →