GOVERDHAN J vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/1114/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01001728202527 March 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's rectification request dated 04.12.2015 and pass an appropriate order or take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court noted the petitioner's grievance that the rectification request had not been considered and the respondent's submission agreeing to consider it within a reasonable time. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. No specific findings were made on the merits of the rectification request or the impugned order itself, as the primary focus was on ensuring the request was addressed by the authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Goverdhan J., legal heir of B. L. Janardhana (deceased), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition challenged an order dated 16.05.2015 passed by the Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore, concerning Assessment Year 2014-15. The petitioner's primary grievance was that their rectification request, filed on 04.12.2015, had not been considered by the respondent authority. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order, direct the consideration of the rectification request, and prevent coercive action until the disposal of the writ petition. The respondent's counsel indicated that the rectification request would be considered if reasonable time was granted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondent authority has failed to consider the petitioner's rectification request dated 04.12.2015 for Assessment Year 2014-15, thereby violating principles of natural justice and statutory obligations under the Income-Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their rectification request, filed on 04.12.2015, had not been considered by the respondent authority, leading to the present writ petition seeking a direction for its consideration and quashing of the impugned order. The petitioner also sought to prevent coercive recovery steps. Revenue's Contention: The respondent's counsel submitted that if reasonable time were granted, the respondent would consider and pass a necessary order on the rectification request.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:13408 WP No. 1114 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 1114 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

GOVERDHAN J., S/O JANARDHAN B. L., LEGAL HEIR OF B. L. JANARDHANA (DECEASED), F-1 M/S. JANARDHANA SILK HOUSE, J.C.ROAD, UNITY BUILDING, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, INDIA – 560 002. PAN - ABIPJU6439P …PETITIONER (BY SMT. BORKAR SHEETAL SUBODH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BMTC BUILDING, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA – 560 095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.05.2015 DIN NO. CPC/1415/A3/1434869646 VIDE ANNEXURE-B IN RESPECT OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 UNDER THE INCOME-TAX 1961 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

Digitally signed by NANDINI D Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:13408 WP No. 1114 of 2025

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of quashing the impugned order dated 16.05.2015, CPC/1415/A3/1434869646, DIN No. vide ANNEXURE B, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2014-15, under the income-tax, 1961 passed by the respondent authority; (ii) issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the like nature of writ, directing the concerned competent respondent authority to consider the rectification request filed by the petitioner vide acknowledgement No.899721700041215 for AY. 2014-15, Dated 04.12.2015 vide ANNEXURE-C; And delete the impugned demand which are leading to double income carried out by the respondent- assessing officer order dated 16.05.2015, DIN No.CPC/1415/A3/1434869646 vide ANNEXURE-B, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2014-15, under the income-tax, 1961 passed by the respondent authority; (iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the like nature of writ, directing the concerned competent respondent authorities, not to proceed with any kind of coercive initiative against the order dated 16.05.2015, DIN No.CPC/1415/A3/1434869646, vide ANNEXURE-B, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2014-15, under the income-tax, 1961 passed by the respondent authority; till disposal of this Writ Petition; (iv) issue a Writ of Prohibition or any other writ of like nature, directing the respondents not to proceed with coercive steps

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:13408 WP No. 1114 of 2025

by way of any proceedings of whatsoever in nature, with respect to the order dated 16.05.2015, DIN No. CPC/1415/A3/1434869646, vide ANNEXURE-B, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2014-15, under the income- tax, 1961 passed by the respondent authority; till disposal of this Writ Petition; and (v) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3.

It is the grievance of the petitioner that his rectification request dated 04.12.2015 at Annexure-C submitted to the respondent has not been considered sofar by them nor any order has been passed on the same. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that if reasonable time is given, they would consider and pass necessary order on the said rectification request. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and rival submissions, the respondent is hereby directed to address the

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:13408 WP No. 1114 of 2025

grievances of the petitioner and consider his rectification request dated 04.12.2015 at Annexure-C and pass appropriate order / take appropriate decision, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →