ODIYOOR SRI VIVIDHODDESHA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP/26258/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01056836202515 September 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in its oral order, acknowledged the petitioner's submission to restrict the prayer to seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of the appeal. Consequently, the Court deemed it appropriate to direct the 1st Respondent, the Appellate Authority, to dispose of the appeal within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court further observed that no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner until the disposal of the appeal. The specific grounds for the demand notice or the merits of the appeal were not adjudicated upon. The issue of quashing the demand notice was implicitly not decided as the prayer was restricted. The ratio decidendi is that when a party seeks expeditious disposal of a pending appeal and the appellate authority has the power to decide it, the High Court may direct its disposal within a reasonable timeframe, while ensuring no coercive steps are taken in the interim.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Odiyoor Sri Vividhoddesha Souharda Sahakari Sangha Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition challenged a demand notice dated 07-08-2025 issued by the Income Tax Officer (3rd respondent) and sought quashing of this notice. Alternatively, the petitioner prayed for a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (1st respondent) to expeditiously dispose of an appeal filed by the petitioner on 07-12-2024. The petitioner also sought a stay on any demand of Income Tax until the appeal was decided. The assessment year(s) and the specific amount in dispute were not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The procedural history involves the issuance of a demand notice and the pendency of an appeal before the appellate authority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the demand notice dated 07-08-2025, issued by the Income Tax Officer, should be quashed, as per Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether a writ in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on 07-12-2024? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner, through its counsel, initially sought to challenge the demand notice. However, the counsel ultimately restricted the prayer to seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of the pending appeal before the first respondent. The petitioner relied on the general principles of administrative law and the right to a speedy resolution of disputes. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the respondents (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Assessing Officer, and Income Tax Officer).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 226,Section 227

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36696 WP No. 26258 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 26258 OF 2025 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

ODIYOOR SRI VIVIDHODDESHA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD (REGD. UNDER KSS ACT, 1997) SHRI GURU DEVATTA SAMSTHANAM ODIYOOR, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-575 243 REP. BY ITS CEO – SRI DAYANANDA SHETTY.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE ROOM NO.356, C.R. BUILDING I.P. ESTATE NEW DELHI-110002.

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36696 WP No. 26258 of 2025

2.

ASSESSING OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSEMENT CENTRE DELHI-110002.

3.

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 (1) C R BUILDING, N G ROAD ATTAVARA, MANAGALURU, D.K.-575001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. TIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 07-08-2025 PASSED IN ORDER NO. ITBA/RCV/F/17/2025- 26/1079392357(1) PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-K BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARIOR AND ETC.

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

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36696 WP No. 26258 of 2025

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “i). Quash the Demand Notice dt: 07-08-2025 passed in Order No.ITBA/RCV/F/17/2025-26/1079392357(1) passed by the 3rd Respondent marked as ANNEXURE "K" by issuing a writ in the nature of Certiorari;

OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE

i). issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the 1st Respondent to dispose off the appeal dt: 07-12-2024 marked as ANNEXURE – G filed by the Petitioner in an expeditious manner and till the disposal of the said appeal, not to make any demand of Income Tax from the petitioner; and

ii). grant such other relief as may be deemed fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of equity and justice.” 2. Heard Sri Mahesh R. Uppin, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri M. Tirumalesh, learned counsel for respondents. 3. Though the demand notice dated 07.08.2025 is sought to be challenged, the learned counsel for the petitioner would

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36696 WP No. 26258 of 2025

restrict his prayer for a direction for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, for expeditious disposal of the appeal. 4. In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.1 - Appellate Authority to dispose the appeal, within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, it is needless to observe that no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 131

More judgments on Section 227

All 314 judgments and leading authorities on Section 227 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →