MR. J LOKANATHA BABU NAIDU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The petitioners, after arguing the matter for some time, submitted that the writ petition be disposed of as withdrawn. They sought to reserve liberty to pursue other available legal remedies, including approaching the competent Civil Court to ventilate their grievances against respondents 2 to 4. The Court accepted this submission. Accordingly, the petition was disposed of as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the petitioners to pursue remedies available in law against respondents 2 to 4, including approaching a Civil Court. The Court also noted that in the event of such proceedings, respondents 2 to 4 would be entitled to contest them in accordance with law. No decision was made on the merits of the issues raised.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, Mr. J. Lokanatha Babu Naidu and Mr. J.L. Gotham, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. They sought directions against the Commissioner of Income Tax (1st Respondent) to cancel the PAN cards of respondents 2, 3, and 4. The petitioners also requested directions for respondents 2 to 4 to surrender their PAN cards and refrain from using them in transactions related to the sale of sites formed by M/s. J.V.Wodeyar Infrastructure. The petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Notice to respondents 2 to 4 was dispensed with by the Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the Commissioner of Income Tax to cancel the PAN cards of respondents 2 to 4 based on the petitioners' representations dated 07.09.2024. 2. Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing respondents 2 to 4 to surrender their PAN cards to the 1st Respondent. 3. Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing respondents 2 to 4 not to use their PAN cards in any transactions pertaining to the sale of sites formed by M/s. J.V.Wodeyar Infrastructure. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners sought the aforementioned directions from the Court. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contentions from the revenue (1st Respondent) regarding the merits of the case. The focus was on the petitioners' submission to withdraw the petition.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9681 WP No. 447 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 447 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. MR. J. LOKANATHA BABU NAIDU @ J BABU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O. LATE. J. VENKATASWAMY NAIDU. 2. MR. J.L. GOTHAM, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, S/O. J.LOKANATH BABU NAIDU, PARTNER, M/S.VENSAPALA BUILDERS, OFFICE AT NO.361, ' SHAKTINILAYA', 9TH MAIN, VIDYAPEETA LAYOUT, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-85. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJAGOPALA NAIDU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING 1, QUEENS RD, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. MR. MANJUNATH.S. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O B.Y. SHIVAPPA, R/AT NO.275, 11TH CROSS Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9681 WP No. 447 of 2025 MARATHALLI, BENGALURU-560 037. 3. MR. MRUDUL. M.U., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O. M.I UNNIKRISHNANA, R/AT NO.3, 10TH MAIN ROAD, 7TH CROSS MALLESHPALYA, BENGALURU-560 075. 4. MR. MUKKANNA GOUDAR BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O. ADEVAPPA GOUDAR, R/AT NO.183, 5TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE, HEBBALA, MYSORE-570 017. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, AGA FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 06.03.2025)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R- 1 TO CANCEL THE PAN CARDS OF THE R-1 TO 4 BY CONSIDERING REPRESENTATIONS DTD 07.09.2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9681 WP No. 447 of 2025 ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to cancel the Pan cards of the respondents 2 to 4 by considering representations dt: 07/09/2024 as per "ANNEXURE-F"; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 4 to surrender the Pan cards to the 1st respondent forthwith. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 4 not to use their Pan cards in any of the transactions pertaining to sale of sites formed by M/s. J.V.Wodeyar Infrastructure. (iv) Grant such other writ, order or injunction or relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case including the order as to costs;" 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to respondent Nos.2 to 4 is dispensed with. 3. After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petition may be
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:9681 WP No. 447 of 2025 disposed of as withdrawn, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to take recourse to such other remedies as available in law including approaching the competent Civil Court ventilating their grievance against respondent Nos.2 to 4 in accordance with law. 4. The aforesaid submission is placed on record. 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to recourse such remedies as available in law against respondent Nos.2 to 4 including approaching the competent Civil Court in accordance with law. In the event petitioners initiate appropriate proceedings against respondent Nos.1 as well as respondent Nos.2 to 4, respondent Nos.2 to 4 would be entitled to contest the said proceedings in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE DS CT: TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shri. Adbul Rahim vs. The State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 13 Nov 2026
- Sandhyarani Das vs. The Superintendent Of CGST And Central ExciseOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- M/S.Pitabas Jena,Pokharigaon, Cuttack vs. Supernitendent, Cuttack-Iii, Range, CuttackOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Sudarshan Behera vs. Superintendent Angul Circle, AngulOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Gayatri Priyadarshini Bisoi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Cuttack-Ii,Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 11 Nov 2026