SRINIVASA PUTTAGUNTA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT

PDF · subscribers
WP/29556/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01064293202630 September 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD7 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition in part. It discerned bonafides in the petitioner's failure to participate in the assessment proceedings. For a complete adjudication, the Court found it necessary to interfere with the Assessment Order. Consequently, the Assessment Order dated 28.02.2026 under Section 144 r.w.s. 144B, the Show Cause Notice dated 28.02.2026 under Section 272A(1)(d), the Show Cause Notice dated 28.02.2026 under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A, the Penalty Order dated 27.08.2026 under Section 272A(1)(d), and the Penalty Order dated 03.09.2026 under Section 270A were quashed. The respondents were directed to provide the petitioner an opportunity to file a response to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.01.2026 upon receipt of a certified copy of the order. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Srinivas Puttagunta, filed a writ petition challenging an ex parte assessment order dated 28.02.2026 under Section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year (AY) 2024-25, along with related show cause notices and penalty orders. The petitioner contended that he was unaware of the proceedings because his former Chartered Accountant's email ID was on record, and he had not updated his contact details. He discovered the assessment order when accessing the portal for a notice under Section 148A for a different AY and immediately updated his email address. The petitioner claimed bonafide ignorance and sought an opportunity to present his case.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed under Section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2024-25, which is an ex parte order, should be quashed on the grounds of the petitioner's bonafide lack of knowledge of the proceedings. 2. Whether the show cause notices and penalty orders issued under Section 272A(1)(d) and Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2024-25, should be quashed. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that he was unaware of the notices uploaded on the portal due to an outdated email ID associated with his former Chartered Accountant. He claimed bonafide ignorance and stated that he only became aware of the assessment order when he accessed the portal for a different matter. He sought an opportunity to show cause against the disallowance. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment records that the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents accepted notice and was heard, but does not detail the revenue's specific arguments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 274,Section 270A,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 29556 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

SRINIVASA PUTTAGUNTA S/O SHRI P SHIVARAMAKRISHNAPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RO 257/7, NEAR THIRUMALA BAR, DOLLARS COLONY, SHAMANUR, DAVENGERE 577 004 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HEMANT VENKATRAY PAI., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, REP. BY ADDL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110 003

2.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, SHREE TOWERS, HADADI MAIN ROAD,

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR OPP. DRR HOSPITAL, DAVANAGERE 577 002 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE A/W; SRI. DILIP, ADVOCATE TOGETHER WITH; SRI. VINAYAKA S. PANDIT, ADVOCATE )

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.02.2026 PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S. 144B OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2024-25 BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/144/2025-26/1086699302(1), HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE – A; B) QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED28.02.2026 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 272A(1)(D) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2024-25 BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 BEARING ITBA/PNL /S/ 272A (1)(D)/2025-26/1086699094(1), HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A1; C) QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED. 28.02.2026 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 270A OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2024-25 BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 BEARING DIN ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2025-26/ 1086699389 (1), MARKED AS ANNEXURE A2; D) QUASH THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 27.08.2026 PASSED UNDER SECTION 272A(1)(D) OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2024-25 BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 BEARING DIN ITBA/PNL/F/272A(1)(D)/2026-27/1092629527(1), HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A3; E) QUASH THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 03.09.2026 PASSED UNDER HC-KAR SECTION 270A OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2024-25 BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 BEARING DIN ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2026-27/1092917084(1), MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A4 AND ETC.,

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's grievance is with the following.

Sl. No. Order/Notice Section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Date Annexure 1 Assessment Order 144 r.w.s 144B 28.02.2026 A 2 Show Cause Notice 272(A)(1)(d) 28.02.2026 A1 3 Show Cause Notice 274 r.w.s 270A 28.02.2026 A2 4 Penalty Order 272A(1)(d) 27.08.2026 A3 5 Penalty Order 270A 03.09.2026 A4

Mr. Hemant Venkatray Pai, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while inviting this Court's attention to the indisputable fact that the Scrutiny Assessment order is an ex parte order, submits the following to HC-KAR support the petitioner’s case for interference by this Court: [a] The petitioner was in business as a subcontractor in the financial year 2023-24, and because of the failure of the employer [the Contractor] to make payments, the petitioner has discontinued the subcontract business. [b] The petitioner was represented by a Chartered Accountant whose e-mail ID was given as the primary contact, but that association is severed many years back. [c] The petitioner, inadvertently, had not changed the contact details, and as such, was not aware of the notices uploaded on the Portal and the petitioner is bonafide in contending HC-KAR that he was not served with the Communication dated 21.11.2025, which is supposed to be sent by speed post. [d] The petitioner accessed the Portal in respect of service of notice under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, ‘the IT Act’] for another assessment year and it is only at this stage, he has come to know about the impugned Scrutiny Assessment Order. The petitioner has immediately updated the primary e-mail address.

Mr. Hemant Venkatray Pai submits that the petitioner is bonafide in setting forth these circumstances and that this Court could consider whether the petitioner must have an opportunity to show cause against the disallowance in the afore circumstances and also because the trigger for the HC-KAR present proceedings is the TDS effected by the contractor who was in default insofar as certain payments to the petitioner. Mr. M. Dilip, the learned Standing counsel who accepts notice for the respondents, is heard.

This Court discerns bonafides in the failure to participate in the proceedings; and for a complete adjudication without protraction, this Court is of the view that there must be interference with the Assessment Order with liberty to the petitioner to file response to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.01.2026. Hence, the following. ORDER [A] The petition is allowed in-part and the following are quashed. Sl. No. Order/Notice Section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Date Annex ure 1 Assessment Order 144 r.w.s 144B 28.02.2026 A 2 Show Cause Notice 272(A)(1)(d) 28.02.2026 A1 HC-KAR 3 Show Cause Notice 274 r.w.s 270A 28.02.2026 A2 4 Penalty Order 272A(1)(d) 27.08.2026 A3 5 Penalty Order 270A 03.09.2026 A4

[B] The respondents are called upon to enable an opportunity to the petitioner to file response to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.01.2026 upon receipt of a certified copy of this order.

SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

RB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 22

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →