JANAHITA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2)(1)

PDF · subscribers
WP/24124/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01050536202403 June 2025Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in its order dated June 3, 2025, permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. This permission was granted based on a memo filed by the petitioner's counsel stating that the grievance against which the writ was filed had been addressed and rectified by the respondents. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the challenge to the Section 226(3) notice, as the petition was disposed of on procedural grounds due to the withdrawal. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Janahita Credit Co Operative Society, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging a notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated April 27, 2024. This notice pertained to Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. The petitioner sought to quash and set aside this notice and prevent any further action based on it. The respondents included the Income Tax Officer, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Karnataka State Co Operative Apex Bank. The matter was listed for orders before Justice B.M. Shyam Prasad.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated April 27, 2024, for AY 2011-12, was valid and whether the petitioner was entitled to have it quashed and set aside. The petitioner's argument, as presented through their counsel, was that the grievance which led to the filing of the writ petition had been addressed and rectified by the respondents. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue side regarding the validity of the notice or the petitioner's contentions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 226(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18802 WP No. 24124 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 24124 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

JANAHITA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY (A CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED LENDING TO ITS MEMBERS) HAVING ITS BUSINESS AT NO.53 10TH CROSS 2ND MAIN WOC ROAD 2ND STAGE MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE 560086

REP BY ITS SECRETARY K N RAMAMURTHY S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/A NO.35/1 9TH MAIN 9TH CROSS PARAMILA NAGARA NANDINI LAYOUT BENGALURU 560096 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO.,ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2)(1) BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18802 WP No. 24124 of 2024

6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560095

2.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU-1 BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560095

3.

THE KARNATAKA STATE CO OPERATIVE APEX BANK REP BY ITS MANAGER NO.191 2ND STAGE WEST OF CHORD ROAD MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BENGALURU 560086 …RESPONDENTS

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED NOTICE U/S 226(3) OF THE ACT DTD. 27.04.2024 IN DIN. ITBA/COM/F/17/2024- 25/1064406408(1) (ANNX-E) FOR THE AY 2011-12; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS BY THEMSELVES BY THEIR SUBORDINATES, SERVANTS OR AGENTS TO WITHDRAW AND CANCEL THE IMPUGNED NOTICE U/S 226(3) OF THE ACT DTD. 27.04.2024 IN DIN.ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1064406408(1) (ANNX-E) FOR THE AY 2011-12; DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PROHIBITING AND RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS BY THEMSELVES THEIR SUB ORDINATES, SERVANTS AND AGENTS FROM TAKING ANY ACTION IN FURTHERANCE OR CONSEQUENT TO NOTICE U/S 226(3) OF THE ACT

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18802 WP No. 24124 of 2024

DTD. 27.04.2024 IN DIN. ITBA/COM/F/17/2024- 25/1064406408(1) (ANNX-E) FOR THE AY 2011-12 ISSUED BY RESPONDENTS.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo for withdrawal, which reads as under: "The Advocate for the Petitioner prays that he may be permitted to the withdraw writ petition, since the grievance against which writ was filed, has been addressed and rectified by the Respondents."

In the light of the afore, the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 226(3)

All 95 judgments and leading authorities on Section 226(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →