SRI. JADERI NARAYANAPPA NARAYANASWAMY, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP/30145/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01060915202419 February 2025Bench: S.G.PANDIT7 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the entire proceedings against the petitioner were in violation of the principles of natural justice. It noted that the assessment order revealed the assessee lacked a digital footprint and an email ID on the department's portal. Furthermore, notices sent via speed post were returned with the remark "No such person." Consequently, the petitioner was not served with notices, including those under Section 148A(b), and had no opportunity to file objections or participate in the proceedings. Recognizing that the petitioner's substantial rights were involved, the Court deemed it appropriate to grant him an opportunity to file objections to the notices issued under Section 148A(b) and participate in further proceedings. The Court quashed the impugned assessment orders and notices and granted four weeks for the petitioner to reply to the Section 148A(b) notices, after which the respondents were to proceed in accordance with law.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri. Jaderi Narayanappa Narayanaswamy, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging assessment orders and notices issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(1), Bengaluru, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that while he had a PAN, he was not an assessee and that notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, uploaded on the department's portal, were not served on him. He also claimed to have no email ID and not to have received any notices. The speed post notices were returned with the remark "No such person." The petitioner argued that the entire proceedings were ex-parte, violating principles of natural justice, and sought an opportunity to file objections. The Revenue argued that it was the petitioner's responsibility to inform of address changes, and he could not claim lack of opportunity.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential notices are liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, specifically due to non-service of notices on the petitioner? Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argued that notices issued under Section 148A(b) were not served, and he had no email ID or knowledge of the proceedings. The speed post notices returned with the remark "No such person," rendering the entire assessment order ex-parte and violating natural justice. The petitioner sought an opportunity to file objections. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that the petitioner could not claim a lack of opportunity as it was his responsibility to inform of any address changes. The return of speed post notices with "No such person" did not absolve him of this responsibility.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148A(b),Section 271(1)(b),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 30145 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI. JADERI NARAYANAPPA NARAYANASWAMY, S/O SRI. JADERI NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 406, MULBAGAL BAZAR S.O., MULBAGAL, KOLAR - 563 131. PAN ANWPN3432C …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENKATESH. G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(1), BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095.

2.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARNATAKA AND GOA, C.R.BUILDING,

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. M.DILIP, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 RWS 144 OF THE ACT DATED 28/02/2024 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1061699786(1) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1; QUASH THE COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 28/02/2024 BEARING DIN AND DOCUMENT NO. ITBA/AST/S/114/2023-24/1061699852(1) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE - A2; AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri. Venkatesh.G., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Dilip.M., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the writ petition papers. 2. The petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) and consequential orders passed on the ground that the same are in violation of principles of natural justice. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has taken PAN, he is not an assessee. It is submitted that Notices issued under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act under Annexure-B1 dated 06.02.2023 and Annexure- B2 dated 18.02.2023 were uploaded on the Income Tax Department Portal, but not served on the petitioner. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner had no Email-ID nor received any Notices from the respondents. Learned counsel in that regard invites attention of this Court to Assessment Order at Annexure-A1 and submits that the Notices sent through speed post was not served on the petitioner and

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

was returned back by postal authorities with the remarks “No such person”. In that circumstances, learned counsel submits that entire proceedings and Assessment Order passed are ex-parte and the petitioner had no opportunity whatsoever to file objection and to participate in the proceedings. Thus, learned counsel would submit that since no Notices were served on the petitioner, the petitioner seeks for an opportunity to file objection and participate in the proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri. Dilip.M., would submit that though the petitioner had no Email-ID on the e-filing portal of department, Notices sent through speed post returned back by postal authorities with the remarks “No such person”. It was the responsibility of the assessee or concerned Officer to inform with regard to change of address. In that circumstances, the petitioner cannot plead that he had no opportunity to participate in the proceedings. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to participate in

- 5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

the proceedings and file objection to Notices under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act. 6. A perusal of the Assessment Order at Annexure-A1 dated 28.02.2024 makes it abundantly clear that assessee was not having digital footprint and E-Mail ID on e-filing portal of department. It also reveals that Notice sent to assessee through speed post at the assessee address returned back with postal shara “No such person”. In that circumstance, the entire proceedings against the petitioner is in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner was not served with Notices including Notices issued under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act and he had no opportunity to file his objection and participate in the proceedings. When petitioner’s substantial right is involved, I deem it appropriate to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to file objection to Notices under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act and to participate in the further proceedings. Hence, the following: ORDER (a) Writ petition is allowed; (b) Annexure-A1 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1061699786(1); Annexure-A2 bearing DIN &

- 6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

Document No.ITBA/AST/S/114/2023- 24/1061699852(1); Annexure-A3 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1061699841(1) dated 28.02.2024 are quashed; (c) Annexure-A4 bearing DIN No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(b)/2024-25/1067712846(1); Annexure-A5 bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/PNL/S/992/2024-25/1067710643(1); Annexure-A6 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024-25/1067712008(1) dated 17.08.2024 are quashed; (d) Annexure-A7 bearing DIN No.ITBA/PNL/F/271F/2024- 25/1067717942(1); Annexure-A8 bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/PNL/S/271F/2024-25/1067499418(1); Annexure-A9 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024-25/1067717803(1) dated 18.08.2024 are quashed; (e) Annexure-A10 bearing DIN & No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(c)/2024-25/1067515896(1); Annexure-A11 bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/PNL/S/992/2024-25/1067514887(1); Annexure-A12 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024-25/1067515171(1) dated 10.08.2024 are quashed; (f) Annexure-B3 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1050650166(1) dated 11.03.2023 and Annexure-B4 bearing DIN & Notice

- 7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:7817 WP No. 30145 of 2024

No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1050947864(1) dated 18.03.2023 are quashed. (g) Four weeks time granted to the petitioner to reply to Annexure-B1 dated 06.02.2023 and Annexure-B2 dated 18.02.2023, Notices issued under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act. Thereafter, the respondents shall proceed further in accordance with law.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →