ANANTHARAJU KRISHNARAJU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
WP/38034/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01082292202529 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the memo filed by the petitioner seeking to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to reinstitute the proceedings if the circumstances warrant. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the challenges to the notices or the assessment order. The issue regarding the disposal of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was rendered infructuous by the withdrawal of the writ petition.

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 (R1) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The challenged actions included 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 also sought a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (R4) to dispose of an appeal against the assessment order. The petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide the following questions: 1. Whether the notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 22/02/2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for Assessment Year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed. 2. Whether the notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29/10/2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for Assessment Year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the assessment order under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) read with Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31/12/2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for Assessment Year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed. 4. Whether the notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31/12/2019, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for Assessment Year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed. 5. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the petitioner's appeal. Contentions: Petitioner: Sought to quash the aforementioned notices and assessment order, and sought a direction for the disposal of the appeal. The petitioner later filed a memo for withdrawal. Revenue: No arguments recorded in the judgment.

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. 38034 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

ANANTHARAJU KRISHNARAJU SON OF SHRI N ANANTHA RAJU (LATE), AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, NO. 165/2, DARASANI PALYA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU 560076. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAMA P., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHREEHARI.,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

4.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEAL, CIT(A) , BENGALURU - 11, THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, COFFEE BOARD BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, OPP. VISHVESHVARIAH TOWER, BENGALURU - 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP ,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. VINAYAKA S. PANDIT, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH OF THE DIGITALLY SIGNED AND ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED NOTICE U/S 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 22/02/2019 ISSUED BY THE R1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 WHICH BEARS THE NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/153C/2018-19/ 1015139194(1) AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE -D. B) QUASH 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 R1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017- 18 WHICH BEARS THE DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(2)-3/ HC-KAR 2019-20/1019540729(1) AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE- E. C) QUASH 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 R1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE -F1. D) QUASH OF THE ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED NOTICE OF DEMAND UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 31/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE R1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE- F2. E) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT DIRECTING THE R4 TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 AS HAVING RENDERED ACADEMIC /INFRUCTUOUS BY RESERVING LIBERTY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER TO SEEK REVIVAL/RESTORATION IF THE OCCASION SO ARISES PURSUANT TO FILING OF APPEAL BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM 35 ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE -J.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD HC-KAR 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 →