SMT SOMANAHALLY PAPAIAH GEETHA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/21186/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01046094202523 July 2025Bench: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It quashed the order passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B, the penalty notice under Section 272A(1)(d), and the penalty notice under Section 271AAC(1) for Assessment Year 2023-24. The Court reasoned that while there was a default on the petitioner's part in not replying to subsequent notices, the issue of tax liability was not raised in the initial notice under Section 142(1). The Court found that if the petitioner could furnish necessary documents, orders could be passed on merits. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the stage of the show-cause notice dated 14.8.2024. The petitioner was permitted to reply to all clarifications sought and submit relevant documents. The petitioner was directed to file their reply and documents before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer on or before 22.8.2025, and thereafter upload them on the portal once opened.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Smt. Somanahally Papaiah Geetha, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2023-24, along with two penalty notices issued under Section 272A(1)(d) and Section 271AAC(1) of the Act for the same assessment year. The petitioner had initially replied to a notice under Section 142(1) but failed to respond to subsequent notices seeking clarification regarding bank accounts held jointly with her spouse. The impugned orders and notices were issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2023-24, and the penalty notices issued under Section 272A(1)(d) and Section 271AAC(1) of the Act, are liable to be quashed. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that she and her spouse have offered the entire amounts for tax and made payments thereof, implying no tax liability should arise from the total transactions in the joint bank accounts. The petitioner also contended that the issue leading to the assessment was not raised in the initial notice under Section 142(1). Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the revenue. However, it notes the petitioner's default in replying to subsequent notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 142(1),Section 272A(1)(d),Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28049 WP No. 21186 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 21186 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

SMT. SOMANAHALLY PAPAIAH GEETHA AGED 56 YEARS, W/O MP SURESH, PLOT NO.278 HEBBAL INDUSTRIAL AREA, HEBBAL VILLAGE, MYSURU – 570 017 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1) AND TPS, MYSORE – 570 008.

2.

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, REPRESENTED BY 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-110 003 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.TIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED U/S 144 R.WS 1448 DATED 17/03/2075 BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/144/2024-25/1074596384(1) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2073-24 HEREIN

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28049 WP No. 21186 of 2025

MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A.) QUASHING THE PENALTY NOTICE DATED 17/03/2025 ISSUED U/S 272A(1)(D) OF THE ACT BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/PNL/5/272A(1)(0) FL/2024-25/1074553082(1) BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2023-24 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1.

Sri.M.Tirumalesh., learned counsel is directed to accept notice for respondents No.1 and 2. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; i. Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed U/s 144 r.w.S 144B dated 17/03/2025 bearing DIN: ITBA/AST/S/144/2024- 25/1074596384(1) passed by the Respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2023-24 herein marked as Annexure - A.

ii. Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice dated 17/03/2025 issued u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act bearing DIN and Notice No. ITBA/PNL/S/272A(1)(d)_FL/2024- 25/1074553082(1) by the Respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2023-24 herein marked as Annexure – A1.

iii. Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice dated 17/03/2025 issued u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act bearing DIN and Notice No. ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC(1)/2024-25/1074596433(1) by

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28049 WP No. 21186 of 2025

the Respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2023- 24 herein marked as Annexure - A2.

iv. Grant such other reliefs as this Honorable High Court may think fit including the cost of this writ petition.

3.

The petitioner, though had replied to a notice under Sub-section (1) of Section 142, the subsequent notices were not replied to by the petitioner and as such the clarification which has been sought for by the respondents as regards the Bank accounts of the petitioner, where the petitioner held the same jointly with her spouse could not be furnished. 4. The submission of Sri.Ravi Shankar.S.V., learned counsel for the petitioner is that between the petitioner and spouse of the petitioner they have offered the entire amounts for tax as also made payment thereof and as such there is no liability which could be attributed to the petitioner by adding up the total transactions in the said Bank accounts. 5. This issue not being one which had been raised in the notice issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 142, I

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28049 WP No. 21186 of 2025

am of the considered opinion that, though there is a default on part of the petitioner in replying to subsequent notices. On facts, if the petitioner were able to furnish the necessary documents which could be considered by respondent, orders could be passed on merits. As such, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. A Certiorari is issued, order dated 17.03.2025 bearing DIN: ITBA/AST/S/144/2024- 25/1074596384(1) passed by the Respondent No.2 at Annexure-A, notice dated 17.03.2025 bearing DIN and Notice No.ITBA/PNL/S/272A(1)(d)_FL/2024- 25/1074553082 (1) issued by Respondent No.2 at Annexure – A1 and the penalty notice dated 17.03.2025 bearing DIN and Notice No. ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC(1)/2024-5/1074596433(1) issued by Respondent No.2 at Annexure–A2 are quashed.

- 5 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28049 WP No. 21186 of 2025

iii. The matter is remitted to the stage of the show-cause notice dated 14.8.2024 permitting the petitioner to reply to all the clarifications which have been sought for therein as also submit any and all documents with the petitioner and/or spouse wishes to rely upon in relating to the show-cause notice and the impugned order which has been passed. iv. Since the order is passed in the presence of the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to file their reply, clarification and all documents relied upon by the petitioner before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer on or before 22.8.2025. Once the portal is opened by the authorities, the petitioner would be entitled to upload all the above on to the portal.

SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 97

More judgments on Section 144B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →