HALBARGAKAR SURESH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/201051/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC03003762202415 November 2024Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR7 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It noted that the petitioner had contended that the cash deposit belonged to the educational institution, not him. The Assessing Officer had rejected this claim for lack of documentary evidence. However, the petitioner subsequently produced seven documents in the writ petition to establish that the trust and institution were separately assessed and had independent PANs, and that the amount in question belonged to the institution. Since these documents were not available to the Assessing Officer at the time of passing the impugned order, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 28.02.2023 (Annexure-A1) and all consequential notices and orders (Annexures-A2 to A5). The matter was remitted back to the respondent No.1 (ITO) for reconsideration afresh. The petitioner was granted liberty to produce pleadings and documents, and the respondent No.1 was directed to reconsider the matter after providing a reasonable opportunity to the parties and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The Court expressly left undecided any substantive issues regarding the tax liability.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Halbargakar Suresh, is the Principal of M/s. Shree Mate Manikeshwari PUC of Arts, Science College, Bidar, run by Vidyaniketan Educational Trust. The Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-1, Bidar, issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner replied, stating that the cash deposit in question did not belong to him but to the educational institution. Despite this, the ITO passed an order under Section 148A(d) and subsequently issued notices under Section 148, penalty notices under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271(1)(b). The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging these notices and orders. During the proceedings, the petitioner submitted a memo with seven documents to demonstrate that the trust and institution were separately assessed with independent PANs and that the amount belonged to the institution. The Assessing Officer had not accepted the petitioner's earlier contention due to a lack of documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 11.01.2023, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 28.02.2023, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) 3. Whether the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 28.02.2023, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) 4. Whether the order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 05.03.2024, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) 5. Whether the penalty notice under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 05.03.2024, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) 6. Whether the penalty notice under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 05.03.2024, for Assessment Year 2016-17, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The cash deposit did not belong to the petitioner but to the educational institution run by the Vidyaniketan Educational Trust. The petitioner has now produced documents to prove the separate assessment and independent PAN of the trust and institution. Revenue's Contention: There is no merit in the petition and 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 144,Section 144B,Section 274,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 201051 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

HALBARGAKAR SURESH H NO 8-9-270-33/1, SAI DUTTA KRUPA, BEHIND BARID SHAHI GARDEN, GURU NANAK COLONY BIDAR-585401.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR. S.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BIDAR-585401. 2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR E-RAMP, JAWAHARAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110003. 3. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

…RESPONDENTS (SRI. M.THIRUMALESH, ADV. FOR RESPONDENTS)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO i) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148A(b) OF THE ACT DATED 11.01.2023 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN) 2022-23/1048621288(1) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A, 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 (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)

1.

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act dated 11.01.2023 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022- 23/1048621488(1), issued by the respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2016-2017 herein marked as Annexure-A;

(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated 28.02.2023 bearing DIN No.ITB A/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050198879(1)

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

issued b y the respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2016-17 herein marked as Annexure-A1;

(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.02.2023 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1050199044(1) issued by the respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2016-17 herein marked as Annexure-A;

(iv) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed under Section 147 r/w S. 144, r.w.s. 144B dated 05.03.2024 bearing ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1062000726(1) issued by the respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2016-17 herein marked as Annexure-A3;

(v) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 05.03.2024 bearing DIN No.ITBA/PNL/S/271(1)(c)/2023- 24/1062000998(1) by the respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2016-17 herein marked as Annexure- A4.

(vi) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice dated 05.03.2024 passed under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(b) of the Act bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(b)/2023-24/1062000997(1) by the respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2016-17 herein marked as Annexure-A5; 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

- 4 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

3.

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Principal of the M/s. Shree Mate Manikeshwari PUC of Arts, Science Collage, Bidar, which is run by an educational trust known as Vidyaniketan Educational Trust. By way of response pursuant to the notice dated 11.01.2023 issued by the respondent under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the I.T. Act) the petitioner submitted a reply specifically contending that the cash deposit alleged in the notice did not belong to the petitioner, but the same belonged to the aforesaid Educational Institution run by the aforesaid Educational Trust. Despite the specific contention urged by the petitioner in his reply, the respondent Assessing Officer has proceeded to pass the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the I.T. Act, followed by consequential notices, orders, etc., all of which are assailed in the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned order and submits that there is

- 5 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-A1 dated 28.02.2023 will indicate that the response/reply of the petitioner that the amount in question did not belong to him, but actually belonged to the aforesaid college run by the aforesaid trust was not accepted by the respondent Assessing Officer on the ground that no documentary evidence in this regard had been produced. However, in the present petition, in order to establish that the said Trust and the educational institution were separately assessed and had independent PAN numbers and that the amount actually belonged to the aforesaid Educational Institution run by the aforesaid Trust, the petitioner has filed a memo dated 24.10.2024 producing about seven documents. 6. Under these circumstances, since the said documents were not available with the respondent Assessing Officer at the time of passing the impugned order and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit the said documents, I deem it just and appropriate to

- 6 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

set aside the impugned order at Annexure A1 dated 28.02.2023, as well as all consequential notices, orders, etc. at Annexures-A2 to A5 and remit the matter back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration of fresh in accordance with law. 7. In the result I pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A1 and consequential orders at Annexures-A2 to A5 are hereby set aside; (iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law; (iv) Liberty is reserved in favor of the petitioner to produce pleadings, documents, etc; (v) Respondent No.1 shall reconsider the matter afresh after providing sufficient and

- 7 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8527 WP No. 201051 of 2024

reasonable opportunity to the parties and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

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

SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →