KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED vs. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX / INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/20143/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01041759202114 November 2024Bench: M.I.ARUN3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka considered a memo filed by the petitioner on November 14, 2024, praying to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn, with liberty reserved to approach the appellate authority. The Court took the memo on record and accordingly dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in the manner known to law. The Court further directed that if the petitioner were to file an appeal, the Appellate Court shall condone the delay spent by the petitioner in pursuing the writ petition. The registry was directed to return the original annexures after obtaining photocopies. No decision was made on the merits of the assessment order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Karnataka Bank Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka seeking to quash an order dated September 16, 2021, passed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National E-Assessment Centre, under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order pertained to the assessment year 2018-19. The respondents included various income tax authorities. The writ petition was listed for preliminary hearing.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the order dated September 16, 2021, passed by the respondent No. 1 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19, should be quashed. The petitioner sought this relief through a writ petition. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by either the petitioner or the revenue regarding the merits of the assessment order. The matter proceeded based on a memo filed by the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:46203 WP No. 20143 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 20143 OF 2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

1.

KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED, MAHAVEER CIRCLE, KANKANADY, KARNATAKA-575 002. REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER AND CFO MR. MURALIDHAR KRISHNA RAO.

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. MANASA ANANTHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110 003.

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, ITO, MANGALORE- 575 001.

3.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y.V., AND SRI. M.DILIP, ADVOCATES)

Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:46203 WP No. 20143 of 2021

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER DATED 16.09.2021 (ANNEXURE-N) BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1035646243(1) PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 U/S 143(3) R/W 144(B) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 14.11.2024 with a prayer to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach appellate authority in the manner known to law.

2.

The memo is taken on record.

3.

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate authority in the manner known to law. If petitioner were

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:46203 WP No. 20143 of 2021

to file an appeal, the Appellate Court shall condone the delay spent by the petitioner pursuing the writ petition.

4.

Registry is directed to return back the certified/original copies of annexures produced along with the writ petition after obtaining photocopies of the same for record purpose.

Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →