GMR ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/33221/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01068403202405 February 2025Bench: S.G.PANDIT5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to have their say in the matter before an order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is passed. The Court noted that the notice was issued on 08.08.2024, addressed to the petitioner but showing the PAN number of the erstwhile company. The petitioner uploaded objections on 28.08.2024, by which time the respondent-Authorities had already passed the order on 26.08.2024. The Court found that the impugned order was passed without considering the petitioner's objections, which involved substantial rights. Therefore, the Court quashed the impugned order at Annexure-L dated 26.08.2024. The respondent-Authority was directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioner dated 27.08.2024 and pass an appropriate order. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, GMR Enterprises Private Limited, successor to GMR Holdings Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging notices and an order issued under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner contended that the notice under Section 148A(b) dated 08.08.2024, requiring objections by 19.08.2024, was not properly considered. The petitioner filed objections on 28.08.2024, but the impugned order under Section 148A(d) was passed on 26.08.2024, prior to the objections being filed. The petitioner also raised issues regarding the notice being issued to an erstwhile company and the PAN number being wrongly mentioned. The revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, did not dispute that the notice was issued to the erstwhile company due to a wrong PAN number.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed for non-consideration of the objections filed by the petitioner? 2. Whether the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is vitiated due to being issued to an erstwhile company with a wrong PAN number? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that their objections, filed on 28.08.2024, were not considered before the order under Section 148A(d) was passed on 26.08.2024. They stated that the objections were ready by 27.08.2024 but could not be uploaded due to Krishna Janmashtami holiday on 26.08.2024. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the notice was issued to the erstwhile company due to a merger and a wrong PAN number, rendering it improper. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through their counsel, did not dispute that the Section 148A(b) notice was issued to the erstwhile company because the PAN number was wrongly mentioned. They prayed for an appropriate order considering the facts and circumstances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5153 WP No. 33221 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 33221 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

GMR ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO GMR HOLDINGS PVT. LTD, SINCE AMALGAMATED) UNDER COMPANY ACT, 1956 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR HAVING ITS ADDRESS AT NO.25/1 SKIP HOUSE, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 560 025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO, ADV.)

AND:

1.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BANGALORE, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095.

2.

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 3, BENGALURU 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU -560 095.

3.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3, BENGALURU 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK,

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5153 WP No. 33221 of 2024

NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M THIRUMALESH, ADV.)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I. DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONERS CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF BE PLEASED TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148A(B) OF THE ACT DATED 08.08.2024 VIE DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2024-25/1067426686(1) (ANNEXURE-J), ORDER UNDER SECTION 148A(D) DATED 26.08.2024 IN DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2024-25/1067971284(1) (ANNEXURE- L) AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE DATED 26.08.2024 IN DIN AND NOTICE NO.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2024-25/1067972068(1) (ANNEXURE-M) FOR THE AY 2018-19 AND ETC.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel Sri.M.Thirumalesh accepts notice for respondents.

2.

Heard learned counsel Sri.Balaram R. Rao for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.M.Thirumalesh for respondents. Perused the writ petition papers.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of

- 3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5153 WP No. 33221 of 2024

the Constitution of India questioning the order passed under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘1961 Act’) on the ground that the objections filed to the notice under Clause (b) of Section 148A of 1961 Act is not considered. Learned counsel would submit that Annexure-J notice dated 08.08.2024 under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act was issued to the petitioner calling upon to show cause as to why notice under Section 148 of 1961 Act should not be issued and asking him to file objections on or before 19.08.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner filed objections on 28.08.2024 whereas the impugned order is passed on 26.08.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the objections was ready by 27.08.2024 he could not upload the same since 26.08.2024 was Krishna Janmashtami and assesse’s office was on holiday. It is also submitted that the petitioner- company is merged with the erstwhile petitioner-company and notice issued is to the erstwhile company. Therefore, there was no proper notice to the petitioner.

- 4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5153 WP No. 33221 of 2024

4.

Per contra, learned counsel Sri.M.Thirumalesh is not in a position to dispute the position that Section 148A(b) notice was issued to the erstwhile company since the PAN number was wrongly mentioned. However, he submits that taking into the facts and circumstances, prays for passing appropriate order.

5.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that petitioner needs to be given an opportunity to have his say in the matter before order under Section 148A(b) of 1961 Act is passed.

6.

Admittedly, notice is issued on 08.08.2024 though addressed to the petitioner showing PAN number of the erstwhile company; the petitioner uploaded objections on 28.08.2024. By that time, the respondent- Authorities had passed order in terms of Annexure-L on 26.08.2024. Admittedly, the impugned order is without objections by the petitioner. Since the substantial right of

- 5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:5153 WP No. 33221 of 2024

the petitioner is involved, petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to have his say in the matter. Hence, the following: ORDER a) Impugned order at Annexure-L bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/148A/2024-25/1067971284(1) dated 26.08.2024 is quashed.

b) The respondent-Authority is directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioner as at Annexure-K dated 27.08.2024 and pass appropriate order.

c) With the above, writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →