SHRI BARALU SHETTIGOWDA ASHOK vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT

PDF · subscribers
WP/12491/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01028492202622 April 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka set aside the assessment order dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure-A1), the computation sheet (Annexure-A2), and the demand notice (Annexure-A3). The Court reasoned that the assessment order was passed without the benefit of the petitioner's reply, based on material available with the respondents. Given the contentions raised, particularly regarding the incorrect address used for communication and the petitioner's submission of an updated address, the Court found it appropriate to re-open the proceedings. The matter was remitted to the stage of the petitioner filing a reply to the notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The authorities were directed to rescind recovery proceedings addressed to banks forthwith. All contentions on merits were kept open.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri. Baralu Shettigowda Ashok, challenged an assessment order dated 20.01.2026, a computation sheet, and a demand notice for Assessment Year 2015-16. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was ex-parte because all communications were sent to an old address (House No.36, Baralu Village, Baralu Post, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan-573116). The petitioner had updated their address to No.08, Dheemanth Mother Teresa Road, Vidyanagar, Haasan, Beeranahalli, Haasan-573201, as evidenced by e-filing at Annexure-H. The petitioner argued that the revenue was aware of the new address, as indicated by a communication to the bank manager regarding attachment of a bank account, which was sent to the corrected address. The petitioner sought to have the order set aside and the matter remitted to the stage of replying to a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated 20.01.2026, passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2015-16, is liable to be quashed on the ground that it was passed ex-parte due to communications being sent to an incorrect address, despite the petitioner having intimated a change of address. Assessee's Contention: The assessment order is ex-parte because all notices were sent to the petitioner's old address. The petitioner had duly intimated a change of address, and the revenue was aware of this new address, as evidenced by communication sent to the bank regarding account attachment. The petitioner was therefore unable to respond to show-cause notices. Revenue's Contention: The petitioner had participated in appeal proceedings, implying awareness. However, the petitioner countered that the address in the assessment order was the old one, differing from the updated address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI. BARALU SHETTIGOWDA ASHOK

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21914 WP No. 12491 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 12491 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SHRI. BARALU SHETTIGOWDA ASHOK SON OF SHRI SRI SETTI GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.08, DHEAAMNTH MOTHER THERESA ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, BEERANAHALLI, HASSAN, KARNATAKA-573201. PAN NO:ADNPA0714H. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRANAY SHARMA Y., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E/RAMP, JAWARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110003. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1 AND TPS HASSAN, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 2ND STAGE, BELUR ROAD, HASSAN, KARNATAKA - 572301. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21914 WP No. 12491 of 2026 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED, GROUND FLOOR, RING ROAD, BELURU - BENGALURU ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, HASSAN - 573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.01.2026 PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/114/2025-26/1084970517(1) HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21914 WP No. 12491 of 2026 ORAL ORDER Learned counsel, Sri. Thirumalesh accepts notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has called in question the validity of the assessment order at Annexure-A1 as well as the computation sheet at Annexure-A2 and demand notice at Annexure-A3. The petitioner has also sought for allied reliefs as well. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the assessment order is an exparte order, insofar as all communications are stated to have been sent to the old address i.e., House No.36, Baralu Village, Baralu Post, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan-573116. It is submitted that the petitioner had intimated regarding change of address in terms of e-filing as at Annexure-H, wherein it is pointed out that the new address would be No.08, Dheemanth Mother Teresa Road, Vidyanagar, Haasan, Beeranahalli, Haasan-573201. It is submitted that in light

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21914 WP No. 12491 of 2026 of the same, petitioner was not in a position to make out reply to the show-cause notice. 4. It is further submitted that the revenue was aware of such notice as insofar as attachment of bank account is concerned, copy of the communication addressed to the Bank Manager was addressed to the corrected address. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order may be set aside and matter remitted to the stage of reply to notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Learned counsel for the revenue submits that the petitioner has participated in the appeal proceedings and accordingly, it cannot be said that petitioner was unaware. As regards such contention, petitioner submits that the address shown in the assessment order is the old address, which is different from the address updated at Annexure-H.

- 5 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21914 WP No. 12491 of 2026 6. In light of the contention raised and noticing that the assessment order is passed on the basis of material available in possession of the respondents without benefit of any reply of the petitioner, it would be appropriate to re-open the proceedings. 7. Accordingly, the orders at Annexures-A1 to A3 are set aside. The matter is remitted to the stage of reply to notice issued under Section 142(1). In light of the order passed setting aside the orders at Annexures-A1 to A3, authorities to rescind recovery proceedings addressed to the banks as evidenced at Annexure-B, forthwith. All contentions on merits are kept open. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →