KRISHNARAJAPETE CHANDRASHEKARA SHRIKANTH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/11617/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01026093202521 April 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petition. It was an undisputed fact that the petitioner had not submitted a reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b). However, considering the petitioner's assertion that this failure was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, and that they would submit a reply if granted another opportunity, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned orders. Specifically, the order dated 25.03.2024 passed under Section 148A(d), the notice dated 25.03.2024 under Section 148, and the order dated 21.03.2025 passed under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, along with subsequent notices/orders, were set aside. The matter was remitted back to Respondent No.1 for reconsideration from the stage of submitting the petitioner's reply to the Section 148A(b) notice. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to submit additional pleadings and documents, which the respondent was directed to consider before proceeding in accordance with law. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Krishnarajapete Chandrashekara Shrikanth, proprietor of K.B.C. Fuel Station, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition challenged orders passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 TPS, Mandya, and the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The assessment year in question is 2020-21. The petitioner sought to quash an order dated 25.03.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) and subsequent orders dated 21.03.2025 and 24.07.2024 passed under Sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core of the dispute revolves around the petitioner's alleged failure to respond to a notice issued under Section 148A(b).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated 25.03.2024 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is perverse, illegal, and unsustainable in law, warranting its quashing and cancellation by Respondent No.1. 2. Whether the subsequent orders dated 21.03.2025 and 24.07.2024, passed under Sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are also liable to be quashed and the additions made in the hands of the petitioner cancelled. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the notice issued under Section 148A(b) was not received, and consequently, they were unaware of it and could not submit a reply or response with documents. This omission was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. The petitioner requested one more opportunity to submit their reply and for the respondents to proceed accordingly. Revenue's Contentions: The respondents argued that there was no merit in the petition and that it was liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRIKANTH

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 11617 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN: KRISHNARAJAPETE CHANDRASHEKARA SHRIKANTH SHRIKANTH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, PROP K.B.C.FUEL STATION, M.C. ROAD KRISHNARAJPET, KRISHNARAJPET, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 426, KARNATAKA. PAN NO. BLYPS0364P MOB NO. 7090543518 EMAIL ID- SHARU.YATHI@GMAIL.COM …PETITIONER (BY SMT. PRATIBHA R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, CAUVERY PARK ROAD, WARD-1 TPS, MANDYA - 571 426. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSEMT CENTRE NORTH BLOCK DELHI-110 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP AND SRI. H. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.03.2024 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AS BEING PERVERSE, ILLEGAL AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW, THERE BY DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.01 TO CANCEL THE ORDER PASSED U-S 148A (D) IN ITBA-AST-F-148A-2023-24-1063337499(1) DATED 25.03.2024 AY- 2020-21 (ANNEXURE-B) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 25.03.2024 which is produced at Annexure-B as being perverse, illegal and unsustainable in law, there by directing Respondent No.1 to cancel the order passed u/s 148A (d) in ITBA/AST/F/148A/2023- 24/1063337499(1) dated 25.03.2024 AY-2020-21 (Annexure-B).

b) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 21.03.2025 which is produced at Annexure-E as being perverse, illegal and unsustainable in law, there by

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025 directing Respondent No.1 to cancel the order passed u/s 147 r w a 144 r w s 144B of the Act in ITBA/AST/S/147/2024-25/1074850385 dated 21.03.2025 -AY-2020-21 (Annexure-E).

c) Issue a writ in the nature of Prohibition/Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction staying the operation of the impugned orders passed by Respondent No.1 in ITBA/AST/S/147/2024-25/1074850385 dated 24.07.2024-Annexure-E and direct the Respondents to cancel the addition made in the hands of the Petitioner.

d) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the impugned demand issued by Respondent No.1 in ITBA/AST/S/147/2024- 25/1074850385 dated 24.07.2024 - Annexure E.

e) Issue any other writ, order or direction in favour of the Petitioner, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

f) Pass such other order, direction or writ as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, and

g) Direct the Respondents to award the costs of this writ petition.

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice issued by the respondents under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’), was not received by petitioner and he was not aware of the notice and consequently, petitioner could not submit its reply / response along with documents to the said notice. It is submitted that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit reply / response along with documents to the Section 148A(b) notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and as such, if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner to do so by setting aside the impugned orders and notices, the petitioner would do so and respondents may be directed to proceed further in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

- 5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that petitioner has not submitted reply / response along with documents to Section 148A(b) notice. Under these circumstances, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit a reply along with documents to Section 148A(b) notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and if one more opportunity is granted, petitioner would submit reply along with documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure – B dated 25.03.2024, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, the notice at Annexure-C dated 25.03.2024 passed under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, the order at Annexure-E dated 21.03.2025 passed under section 147 read with Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act and subsequent notice / orders, etc., and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting of reply by the petitioner to Section 148A(b) notice and to proceed further in accordance with law. 6. In the result, pass the following:

- 6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16459 WP No. 11617 of 2025 ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Impugned notices / orders at Annexures - B, C and E are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of submitting of reply to the Notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act at Annexure – A dated 06.03.2024.

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., to the respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →