MUNIREDDY MANJUNATHA REDDY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/18332/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01037232202414 November 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the petition and disposed of it in terms of the decision of a co-ordinate bench in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters, dated 28.08.2025. The court quashed the impugned show cause notices and consequential orders, notices etc., at Annexures- A, B, C and F dated 21.03.2022, 31.03.2022, 06.04.2022 and 11.03.2024 respectively. Liberty was reserved in favour of the respondents-Revenue to seek revival of the petition subsequent to the disposal of matters pending before the Apex Court. All rival contentions between the parties in this regard were kept open, and no opinion was expressed on them. The operative part of the cited order stated that impugned show cause notices issued outside the scope of Section 151-A of the Act stand obliterated, and all further proceedings initiated thereto would stand quashed, with liberty to the revenue to revive the petitions. The ratio is that if proceedings are found to be outside the scope of Section 151-A, they are liable to be quashed, subject to revival rights for the revenue.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Munireddy Manjunatha Reddy, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Officer and the Assessment Unit for the assessment year 2015-16. The challenged actions include a notice dated 21.03.2022 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, an order dated 31.03.2022 under Section 148A(d), a notice dated 06.04.2022 under Section 148, and an order dated 11.03.2024 under Section 147 read with Section 144B. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and orders. The revenue contended that the petition lacked merit.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16 is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether the order dated 31.03.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16 is liable to be quashed? 3. Whether the notice dated 06.04.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16 is liable to be quashed? 4. Whether the order dated 11.03.2024 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16 is liable to be quashed? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the present petition is covered by a co-ordinate bench decision of the High Court in Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters, dated 28.08.2025, and thus should be allowed. The petitioner sought to quash all the impugned notices and orders. Revenue's Contention: The revenue 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 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 151-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 18332 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

MUNIREDDY MANJUNATHA REDDY S/O A. MUNI REDDY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS A NO, 41, IBRABANAHALLI VILLAGE MADIWALA POST – 563 130 MALUR TQ KOLAR DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KASHINATH KALMATH, FOR SRI. R. RAMA MURTHY, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD – 1, NEW EXTENSION KOLAR – 563 101

2.

ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI – 110 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE COSNTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 21/03/2022 ISSUED U/S 148A(B) OF THE ACT (ANNEXURE-A) (ITBA/ST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1041123974(1)) ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

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

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

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

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- A. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the Notice dated 21.03.2022 issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act (Annexure A) (ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1041123974(1)] issued for the assessment year 2015-2016 by the 1st Respondent; and B. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 31.03.2022 made u/s 148A(d) of the Act, for assessment year 2015-2016 (Annexure B) [ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021- 22/1042246796(1)] passed by the 1st the Respondent; and C. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act dated 06-04-2022 the assessment year 2015- 2016 (Annexure for C) ITBA/AST/s/148-1/2022- 23/1042565105(1) issued by the 1st Respondent; and D. The Petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 11.03.2024 passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act for the assessment year 2015-16 (Annexure F) (ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1062361309(1)] passed by the 2nd Respondent; and E. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue such other relief or relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice, in the Petitioner's case.”

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 invited my attention to the order of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters - dated 28.08.2025, in order to contend that the present petition deserves to be allowed and disposed of in terms of the said order.

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.

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

5.

As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters - dated 28.08.2025, the operative portion of which reads as under:

"13. I, therefore, pass the following: O R D E R (i) The impugned show cause notices issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer outside the scope of Section 151-A of the Act stand obliterated. All further proceedings initiated thereto, challenged in these cases would stand quashed. (ii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents - revenue to revive all these petitions in the event the Apex Court would hold in favour of the Revenue in the pending before it. (iii) With the aforesaid liberty and to the aforesaid extent, the petitions are allowed. (iv) Contentions of both the parties except the one noted hereinabove, shall remain open to be considered in the event revival of these petitions would become necessary."

- 5 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

6.

The aforesaid order is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and consequently, the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the judgment of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramachandra Reddy's case supra. 7. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed and disposed of in terms of the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters - dated 28.08.2025.

(ii) The impugned show cause notices and consequential orders, notices etc., at Annexures- A, B, C and F dated 21.03.2022, 31.03.2022, 06.04.2022 and 11.03.2024 respectively are hereby quashed.

- 6 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47529 WP No. 18332 of 2024

(iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents - Revenue to seek revival of this petition, subsequent to disposal of the matters pending before the Apex Court and all rival contentions between the parties in this regard are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

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

MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 51

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →