RAMESH SHARMA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/31546/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01065819202403 April 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. It noted that it was undisputed that the petitioner had not submitted a reply to the notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A. However, in view of the petitioner's assertion that his inability to respond was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, and his willingness to submit a reply if granted another opportunity, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order under Section 270A and subsequent notices/orders. The matter was remitted back to Respondent No. 3 (National Faceless Assessment Centre) for reconsideration. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit additional pleadings and documents, which the respondent was directed to consider. The Court did not decide on the merits of the penalty proceedings themselves, focusing solely on providing an opportunity to the assessee to present their case.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ramesh Sharma, proprietor of Gomti Incinco, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, a notice of demand under Section 156, and a computation sheet, all dated August 1, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Respondent No. 1). The petitioner contended that he did not receive the notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and was therefore unaware of it, preventing him from submitting a reply. He claimed this omission was due to bonafide reasons and unavoidable circumstances, seeking an opportunity to respond. The respondents argued that the petition lacked merit and should be dismissed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner was sufficiently notified of the proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and if not, whether the impugned orders are liable to be quashed on this ground? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that he did not receive the notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and was unaware of it. This prevented him from submitting a reply. He claimed this was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, and sought an opportunity to respond. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 274,Section 156,Section 148A,Section 151,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.31546 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

RAMESH SHARMA S/O SRI T. R. SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PROP GOMTI INCINCO, NO.3B-2, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA, 1ST PHASE, KUMBALAGODU, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 074 PRESENTLY R/AT NO.53, 8TH CROSS, JAIMUNIRAO CIRCLE, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 079 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHREEHARI KUTSA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU BMTC BUILDING, 80FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095 THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER THE

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

2.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA,

BENGALURU – 3, THE APPROVING AUTHORITY UNDER THE

SECTION 151 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE,, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095.

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

3.

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC) A CENTRE DESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 144B, OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI – 110 003 REP. BY PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX (NeAC)

4.

ASSESSMENT UNIT A UNIT CREATED UNDER SECTION 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI – 110 003. REP. BY ITS PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX (NeAC) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE DIGITALLY SIGNED AND COMMUNICATED ORDER UNDER SECTION 270A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 01.08.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 WHICH BEARS THE DIN ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2024-25/1067238174(1) ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE J1 AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the digitally signed and communicated order under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 01.08.2024 issued by the Respondent No.1

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

which bears the DIN ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2024- 25/1067238174(1) and enclosed as Annexure - J1. b) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the digitally signed and communicated notice of demand under section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 01.08.2024 issued by the Respondent No.1 which bears the DIN ITBA/PNL/S/156/2024-25/1067233501(1) and enclosed as Annexure – J2. c) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the digitally signed and communicated computation sheet dated 01.08.2024 issued by the Respondent No.1 which bears the DIN ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2023- 24/1063048628(1) and enclosed as Annexure – J3. d) And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice issued by the respondents under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’) was not received by petitioner and

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

he was not aware of the notice and consequently, petitioner could not submit its reply / response along with documents to the said notice. It is submitted that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit reply / response along with documents to the Section 274 r.w.s. 270A notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and as such, if one more opportunity is provided to the petitioner to do so by setting aside the impugned orders and notices, the petitioner would do so and respondents may be directed to proceed further in accordance with law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that petitioner has not submitted reply / response along with documents to Section 274 r.w.s. 270A notice. Under these circumstances, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit a reply along with documents to Section 148A(b) notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause

- 5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

and if one more opportunity is granted, petitioner would submit reply along with documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure – J1 dated 01.08.2024, passed under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act and subsequent notice / orders, etc., and remit the matter back to respondent No.3 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting of reply by the petitioner to Section 274 r.w.s. 270A notice and to proceed further in accordance with law. 6. In the result, pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned notices / orders at Annexures J1 and J2 are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to respondent No.3 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of submitting of reply to the Show Cause Notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 270A of the IT Act at Annexure – E dated 19.03.2024.

- 6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:14318 WP No. 31546 of 2024

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional pleadings, documents, etc., to the respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law.

Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →