APOORVA HARISH RUPAREL vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT

PDF · subscribers
WP/18431/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01040626202602 September 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD11 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petition in part. The court found that the service of notices and communications, including the order under Section 148A(d), to the petitioner's secondary email address and to an address where the petitioner no longer resided were not disputed. The court held that these circumstances provided sufficient reason to interfere. Consequently, the court quashed the notice under Section 148 dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure A), the order under Section 148A(d) dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure A1), the assessment order dated 25.01.2024 (Annexure B), computation sheets (Annexures B1, C1, D1, E1), demand notices dated 25.01.2024, 19.07.2024, 23.07.2024, and 24.07.2024 (Annexures B2, C2, D2, E2), penalty orders dated 19.07.2024, 23.07.2024, and 24.07.2024 (Annexures C, D, E), and the bank attachment notice dated 14.11.2025 (Annexure F). The petitioner was granted liberty to file a response to the notice dated 25.02.2023 under Section 148A(b) with the Income Tax Office, Ward 5(3)(4), Bengaluru, by 05.10.2026. The court left all other questions open for consideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Apoorva Harish Ruparel, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging various notices and orders related to the assessment year 2016-17. These included a notice under Section 148, an order under Section 148A(d), an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144/144B, computation sheets, demand notices under Section 156, penalty orders under Sections 271(1)(b), 271F, and 271(1)(c), and a bank attachment notice. The petitioner contended that he was not served with any of the notices, including the notice under Section 148A(1). He argued that all notices were addressed to his secondary email address or sent to an old address, and that he was residing abroad. The revenue, represented by the Assessment Unit and Income Tax Office, Bangalore, did not dispute the service of notices to the secondary email or the old address.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices and orders issued by the respondents for the assessment year 2016-17 are liable to be quashed on the grounds of improper service, as contended by the petitioner? - Assessee's contention: The petitioner argues that he was not served with any of the notices, including the notice under Section 148A(1). All notices were sent to his secondary email address (apoorva.ruparel@arme.com) or an old residential address. He also points out that an inspection report indicated he no longer resided at the address where some notices were sent. He relies on his primary email address (mrudula.pdka@gmail.com) and states he was residing abroad. - Revenue's contention: The revenue did not dispute that notices were sent to the petitioner's secondary email address and to an address where the petitioner no longer resided. The court heard arguments on whether intervention was warranted to restore proceedings with an opportunity for the petitioner to respond.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 147,Section 156,Section 271(1)(b),Section 271F,Section 271(1)(c),Section 133(6),Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 18431 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

APOORVA HARISH RUPAREL S/O HARISH VINODCHANDRA RUPAREL, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

AUTHORISED SIGNATORY & GPA HOLDER (FATHER) HARISH VINODCHANDRA RUPAREL, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS

RESIDING AT: NO 501, KAVERI K RAHEJA COMPLEX, OPP. DADLANI PARK, PIPELINE ROAD, BALKUM, THANE - 400608 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JANAK PUROHIT, ADVOCATE FOR ; SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110003

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR

2.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 5(3)(4), BANGALORE, HMT BHAWAN, NO. 59, BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU 560032

3.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA AND GOA GROUND FLOOR, CR BUILDING, NO.1 QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001

4.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 3(3)(1), BANGALORE, HMT BHAWAN, NO. 59, BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560032

5.

THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH ,ADVOCATE A/W; SRI. NIRMAL MATHEW, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 15.03.2023 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022- 23/1050798969(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE A); II) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.03.2023, BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NUMBER.

HC-KAR ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050798611(1) PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 148A(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE A-1); III) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.01.2024 BEARING DIN. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1060115515 (1) PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 144 READ WITH SECTION 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE B); IV) QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 25.01.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/114/2023 - 24/1060115591(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE B- 1); V) QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 25.01.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1060115585(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE B-2); VI) QUASH THE IMPUGNED PENALTY ORDER DATED 19.07.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(B)/2024-25/1066856225(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE C); VII) QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 19.07.2024 BEARING DIN 23-NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(B)/2023 - 24/ 1060115668(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR HC-KAR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE C1); VIII) QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 19.07.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE ACT, BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024-25/1066860361(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016- 17 (ANNEXURE C2); IX) QUASH THE IMPUGNED PENALTY ORDER DATED 23.07.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271F/2024-25/1066915029(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 271F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE D); X) QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 23.07.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/271F/2023-24/1060115670(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE D1); XI) QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 23.07.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE ACT, BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024- 25/1066911183(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE D2); XII) QUASH THE IMPUGNED PENALTY ORDER DATED 24.07.2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(C)/ 2024-25/1066965421(1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE E); XIII) QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 24.07.2024 BEARING HC-KAR DIN NO. ITBA/PNL/S/271(1)(C)/20 23-24/ 1060115669 (1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE E1); XIV) QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 24.07.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 UNDER SECTION 156 OF ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024- 25/ 1066959329(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR ASSESSMENT DIN NO. YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE E2); XV) QUASH THE IMPUGNED BANK ATTACHMENT DATED 14.11.2025 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1082603057(1) ISSUED TO THE ICICI BANK LTD. BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 (ANNEXURE F); XVI) DECLARING THAT SECTION 147A OF THE ACT (ANNEXURE A-2) AS INSERTED VIDE THE FINANCE ACT, 2026 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES THE OBJECT, SCHEME AND PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO (X,VI) ABOVE AND SOLELY IN ORDER TO SAVE THE SAID PROVISION FROM THE VICE OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY AS PRAYED FOR ABOVE; XVII) READING DOWN SEC. 147A TO ONLY OPERATE PROSPECTIVELY TO NOTICES ISSUED UNDER S.148 OF THE ACT ON OR AFTER THE DATE OF PASSING OF THE FINANCE ACT, 2026 (NO.4 OF 2026), I.E., 30.03.2026 AND; XVII) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS OR DIRECTIONS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

HC-KAR THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 following which are for the Assessment Year 2016-17. Particulars Section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Date Annexures Notice 148 15.03.2023 A Order 148A(d) 15.03.2023 A1 Assessment Order 144 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B 25.01.2024 B Computation Sheet

25.01.2024 B1 Demand Notice 156 25.01.2024 B2 Penalty Order 271(1)(b) 19.07.2024 C Computation Sheet

19.07.2024 C1 Demand Notice 156 19.07.2024 C2 Penalty Order 271F 23.07.2024 D Computation Sheet

23.07.2024 D1 Demand Notice 156 23.07.2024 D2 Penalty Order 271(1)(c) 24.07.2024 E Computation Sheet

24.07.2024 E1 Demand Notice 156 24.07.2024 E2 Notice 226(3) 14.11.2025 F HC-KAR

2.

The petitioner’s case is that he was not served with any of the notices, including the notice under 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, ‘the IT Act’]. Mr. Janak Purohit, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he would request this Court’s interference for restoration of the proceedings with liberty to the petitioner to file a response to the notice dated 25.02.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act, and to support the petitioner's request for such, the learned counsel submits the following. A. The petitioner's primary E-mail address is mrudula.pdka@gmail.com and the secondary E-mail address is apoorva.ruparel@arme.com. B. All the notices have been addressed to the secondary E-mail or sent to the petitioner's old address.

HC-KAR C. An Inspection Report based after an enquiry on 04.01.2024 under Section 133(6) of the IT Act also mentions that the petitioner no longer resides at the address where some notices have been sent. D. The petitioner has been residing abroad, and the present petition is filed through an authorized representative [his father].

3.

On merits, Mr. Janak Purohit submits that the petitioner has purchased an immovable property in the year 2012 and sold it in the year 2016 under a loss which is part of the Income Tax Returns, and the petitioner can justify return. Mr. M. Thirumalesh, the learned Senior Standing counsel, and Mr. Nirmal Mathew, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents, are heard on whether this Court must intervene in the HC-KAR circumstances to restore the proceedings with an opportunity to the petitioner to file a response to the notice under 148A of the IT Act.

4.

The service of notices/communication, and even the Order under 148A(d) of the IT Act, is to the petitioner’s secondary E-mail Address is not in dispute, and it is also indisputable that the petitioner no longer stays at the address as mentioned. If notice is sent to the petitioner’s secondary E-mail address and if the notice is sent to the address where the petitioner does not reside, this Court is of the view, especially in the present circumstances, that sufficient reasons are offered to interfere on the ground that the petitioner must have another opportunity leaving open all questions to be considered. In the light of the afore, the following.

HC-KAR ORDER The petition is allowed-in-part and the following are quashed with liberty to the petitioner to file response to the notice dated 25.02.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act with the Income Tax Office, Ward 5(3)(4), Bengaluru [the second respondent] by 05.10.2026. Particulars Section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Date Annexures Notice 148 15.03.2023 A Order 148A(d) 15.03.2023 A1 Assessment Order 144 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B 25.01.2024 B Computation Sheet

25.01.2024 B1 Demand Notice 156 25.01.2024 B2 Penalty Order 271(1)(b) 19.07.2024 C Computation Sheet

19.07.2024 C1 Demand Notice 156 19.07.2024 C2 Penalty Order 271F 23.07.2024 D Computation Sheet

23.07.2024 D1 HC-KAR Demand Notice 156 23.07.2024 D2 Penalty Order 271(1)(c) 24.07.2024 E Computation Sheet

24.07.2024 E1 Demand Notice 156 24.07.2024 E2 Notice 226(3) 14.11.2025 F

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →