ANANTHARAJU KRISHNARAJU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
WP/37996/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01082280202529 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo seeking to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition if circumstances warranted. The Court accepted the memo and accordingly, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the validity of the notices or the assessment order. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn, granting liberty to the petitioner to refile.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anantharaju Krishnaraju, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging several notices and an assessment order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and other revenue authorities. The assessment year in question is 2014-15. The challenged actions include a notice under Section 153C dated 22/02/2019, a notice under Section 143(2) dated 29/10/2019, an assessment order under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) and Section 153D dated 31/12/2019, and a notice of demand under Section 156 dated 31/12/2019. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and the assessment order.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide whether the notices and the assessment order issued by the revenue authorities for the assessment year 2014-15 were valid and legally sustainable. The petitioner sought to quash these actions. The specific questions were implicitly: (1) Whether the notice under Section 153C dated 22/02/2019 was valid? (2) Whether the notice under Section 143(2) dated 29/10/2019 was valid? (3) Whether the assessment order dated 31/12/2019 passed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) and Section 153D was valid? (4) Whether the notice of demand dated 31/12/2019 under Section 156 was valid? The petitioner's arguments, as indicated by the prayer, were that these actions were flawed and should be quashed. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 143(2),Section 143(3),Section 153D,Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 37996 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

ANANTHARAJU KRISHNARAJU S/O SHRI N ANANTHA RAJU (LATE) AGE ABOUT 69 YEARS NO 165/2 DARASANI PALYA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGAURU 560076 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAMA P., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHREEHARI KUTSA.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2) BENGALURU CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU 560001

2.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) BENGALURU THE SPECIFIED AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD,

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR BENGALURU 560004

3.

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL RANGE 1 BENGALURU CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU 560004 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP ,ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING OF THE DIGITALLY SIGNED AND ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 22/02/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 WHICH BEARS THE NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/153C/2018-19/1015139193(1) AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE D. B) QUASHING OF THE DIGITALLY SIGNED AND ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 29/10/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 WHICH BEARS THE DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(2)_3/2019-20/1019540096(1) AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE E. C) QUASHING OF THE ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153C R.W.S. 143(3) R.W.S. 153D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 31/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE F1. D) QUASHING OF THE ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED NOTICE OF DEMAND UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 31/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE F2.

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 learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo for withdrawal which reads as under.

"The petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition filed before this Hon'ble Court with liberty to file a fresh petition. The petitioner may be granted liberty to reinstitute the proceedings if the circumstances warrant."

The memo is accepted and the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →