SRI. KALURAM CHAWAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/17112/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC01040119202324 April 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. It was an undisputed fact that the petitioner had submitted a reply and requested a personal hearing, which was not considered by the respondent. The respondent proceeded to pass the order under Section 148A(d) without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. Therefore, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and subsequent orders. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting the reply to the Section 148A(b) notice. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit additional pleadings and documents, and the respondent was directed to consider them and provide an opportunity for a personal hearing before proceeding in accordance with law. The impugned orders at Annexures-C and L were set aside.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri. Kaluram Chawat, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging a notice dated 25.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner also challenged the subsequent order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and the assessment order dated 18.05.2023 under Section 147 read with Section 144B, along with the demand notice. The petitioner contended that the respondent issued the Section 148A(b) notice, to which a reply was filed. However, the respondent allegedly passed the Section 148A(d) order without considering the reply and without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and orders and, alternatively, requested a direction for a personal hearing and disclosure of materials used for reopening.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned notice dated 25.05.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2013-14 is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether the impugned order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed? 3. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 18.05.2023 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the demand notice are liable to be quashed? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the respondent failed to consider the reply filed to the Section 148A(b) notice and did not provide an opportunity for a personal hearing before passing the order under Section 148A(d). The petitioner sought an opportunity to appear, submit a fresh reply with documents, and have it considered. Alternatively, the petitioner requested the respondent to furnish the application for approval by the Pr.CIT, the order of the Pr.CIT approving reopening, and the materials collected to justify the reopening, to enable rebuttal. Revenue's Contentions: The respondents contended that there is no merit in the petition and that it is liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 17112 OF 2023 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KALURAM CHAWAT, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE KANNAIAHLAL JAIN, 29, MIG 1st STAGE, DEEPAK ENTERPRISES AND PAWN BROKERS, KUVEMPUNAGAR MAIN ROAD, MYSURU – 570 017 (PAN NO. AFCPC5735P) …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI S. PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) REAC MYSURU, KARNATAKA – 570 008.

2.

THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC DELHI – 110 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 25.05.2022 IN FILE NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1043172351(1) PASSED U/S 148A(b) OF THE ACT BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013- 14(ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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 of Certiorari or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice dt.25.5.2022 In File No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1043172351(1) passed under sec 148A(b) of the Act by the Respondent for the assessment year 2013-14 (ΑΝΝEXURE-'A')(b) issue a Writ of Certiorari or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the Impugned order dated 30.07.2022 In F.No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044340999(1) passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the Respondent for the assessment year 2013-14 (ANNEXURE-'C'); (c) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned assessment order dated 18.5.2023 in F.No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1052953834(1) passed under Section 147 rws 144B of the Act and Demand notice issued u/s.156 dt.18.5.2023 in File No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1052954012(1) by the Second Respondent for the assessment year 2013-14 (ANNEXURE-`L'); (d) issue a Writ of Prohibition or a direction in the nature of Writ of Prohibition restraining the respondent from enforcing the demand raised vide impugned assessment

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

order dated 18.5.2023 in F.No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1052953834(1) passed under Section 147 rws 144B of the Act and Demand notice issued u/s.156 dt.18.5.2023 in File No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1052954012(1) by the Second Respondent for the assessment year 2013-14 (ANNEXURE-`L'); (e) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction the nature of Writ of Mandamus in case the Hon'ble Court is not desired to quash the notice under sec 148A(b) to direct the assessing authority to provide the copy of the application for approval by the Pr.CIT and also the order of the Pr.CIT approving the reopening of the assessment under sec 147 of the Act and to direct the Respondent to furnish the information collected for justifying the reopening as prayed for to enable the petitioner to rebut and object; (f) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to provide the materials collected to justify the formation of reason for reopening the assessment by issuing a notice under sec 147 of the Act to enable the petitioner to rebut before passing the order under sec 148A(d) followed by the Issuance of notice 148 of the Act. (g) pass such other order, direction or writ as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, and (h) direct the Respondents to award the costs of this Writ Petition.

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

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 respondent No.1 issued a show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’), dated 25.05.2022. The petitioner filed its reply dated 20.06.2022 to the said notice. Respondent No.1 without considering the said reply and without providing an opportunity of personal hearing, has passed the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act. It is submitted that if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner for personal hearing by setting aside the impugned orders and notices, the petitioner would appear before the concerned respondent and once again submit his reply to the show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) along with relevant documents, which may be considered by the respondents and proceed further in accordance with law.

- 5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

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. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that petitioner has submitted reply / response, along with documents to Section 148A(b) notice requesting for an opportunity of personal hearing, which has not been considered by respondent No.1, who did not provide any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and proceeded to pass the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act. If one more opportunity is granted, petitioner would appear before the concerned respondent and submit reply along with documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure – C dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the IT 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: ORDER

- 6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:16833 WP No. 17112 of 2023

(i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned orders at Annexures-C and L dated 30.07.2022 and 18.05.2023, respectively, 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 Show Cause Notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act at Annexure- A dated 25.05.2022.

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., to the respondent, who shall consider the same and provide an opportunity of personal hearing and proceed further, in accordance with law.

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

BMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 73

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →