BANGALORE THULASEEDAS SRINATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/14434/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01028868202405 July 2024Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the order under Section 148A(d), the notice under Section 148, the assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, and the penalty notices. The Court reasoned that the proceedings had proceeded ex-parte, and considering the petitioner's explanation for non-participation and his assertion of having a valid explanation for the deposits, it would serve the ends of justice to grant him another opportunity. The matter was relegated to the stage of filing a reply to the notice under Section 148A(b). All contentions were kept open. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned orders and notices and to allow the petitioner to participate in the proceedings from the stage of replying to the Section 148A(b) notice.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Bangalore Thulaseedas Srinath, filed a writ petition challenging notices and orders related to reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner contended that while his email ID was registered, he did not check it and was unaware of the proceedings. He also claimed that the income in question pertained to his father, not himself, and that he could provide an explanation if given an opportunity. The assessment order noted that the petitioner had not responded to the show cause notice. The High Court observed that the proceedings had proceeded ex-parte and that the petitioner claimed to have a valid explanation for the deposits.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order under Section 148A(d) and subsequent proceedings, including the notice under Section 148, assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B, and penalty notices, are valid, considering the petitioner's claim of non-awareness due to not checking his registered email and his assertion that the income belonged to his father and could be explained. Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner was unaware of the proceedings as he did not check his registered email ID. - The income in question was not his but his father's. - He could explain the deposits if granted an opportunity. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records no specific contentions from the revenue regarding the petitioner's arguments. However, the assessment order noted the petitioner's failure to respond to the show cause notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 14434 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. BANGALORE THULASEEDAS SRINATH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O. LATE B.S.THULASEEDAS NO. 180, 4TH MAIN, BEML LAYOUT, BASAVESWARANAGAR BANGLAORE-560 079. PAN:GRMPS1178C … PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2)(1) BANGALORE-560 095. 2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ADDITIONAL /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 DELHI-110003. 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 THE OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 BMTC BUILDING KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILIP M., ADVOCATE) ***

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE UNDER SEC 148A(b) OF THE ACT, DTD 25.03.2022 BEARING DIN NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021- 22/1041520059(1) ISSUED BY THE R-1 FOR THE AY 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A. QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SEC 148A(d) OF THE ACT, DTD 05.04.2022, BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1042521529(1) ISSUED BY THE R- 1 FOR THE AY 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER

Petitioner has called in question the validity of the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') at Annexure-A1 as well as the subsequent proceedings including the notice under section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2; assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144, 144B of the Act at

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 Annexure-A3 and the penalty notices at Annexures-A4 and A5. 2. It is the case made out by the petitioner that though his e-mail ID was registered in the portal, however, he has never checked his email ID and hence, he was not aware of the proceedings. It is submitted that even otherwise, he has a good case on merits as information made out in Section 148-A(b) notice at Annexure-A could be clarified to the effect that the income was not that of the petitioner but that of his father. It is submitted that if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner, petitioner will be in a position to explain the deposits. 3. After hearing the matter for sometime, it is noticed that the assessment order at Paragraph No.2 does indicate that the petitioner has not made out any response to the show cause notice. Even otherwise, taking note of the contention of the petitioner that he would be in a position to explain the deposits and the present

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 proceedings could be dropped, the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the respondents. 4. Taking note that the proceedings have proceeded ex-parte and explanation is being made by the petitioner regarding non-participation in the proceedings and also noticing that the petitioner does have the explanation to be made to the notice under Section 148- A(b) of the Act, it would serve the ends of justice by affording another opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the proceedings. 5. Accordingly, the order under Section 148-A(d) of the Act at Annexure-A1; notice under section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A2; assessment order under Section 147 read with Sections 144, 144B of the Act at Annexure-A3 and the penalty notices at Annexures-A4 and A5 are set aside. The matter is relegated to the stage of reply to the notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Act. Petitioner to make out his reply and the respondent to proceed thereafter. All contentions are kept open.

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC:25431 WP No. 14434 of 2024 6. Writ petition is disposed off accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE VP

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →