MR MOHAMMED NOORULLAH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/4095/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01009335202519 February 2025Author: S.G.PANDIT6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It was held that the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to file objections to the Section 148A(b) notice and participate in the proceedings. The Court noted that if the petitioner was not residing in India and notices were sent to a previously engaged tax practitioner's email address, it would not constitute providing an opportunity to the petitioner. Since no notices were served on the petitioner by any mode, he had no opportunity to file objections and participate. Consequently, several orders and notices, including Annexures-A3 to A8, were quashed. The petitioner was granted four weeks to file objections to the notice under Section 148A(b) (Annexure-A2), after which the respondents were directed to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner was also directed to appear before Respondent No.1 on March 17, 2025. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mr. Mohammed Noorullah, residing in China since 2007, filed a writ petition challenging proceedings initiated under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that no notice under Section 148A(b) was served on him, and subsequent orders were passed ex-parte. He argued that notices were sent to his previously engaged tax practitioner, not his email address. The revenue's counsel was unable to confirm whether the notices were served on the petitioner. The High Court considered the matter for final disposal with the consent of both parties.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was duly served on the petitioner, thereby providing him an opportunity to file objections and participate in the proceedings? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's contentions: - No notice under Section 148A(b) was served on the petitioner. - Subsequent orders were passed ex-parte. - The petitioner has been residing in China since 2007. - Notices were sent to a previously engaged tax practitioner, not the petitioner's email address. - The petitioner seeks an opportunity to file objections to the Section 148A notice and participate in further proceedings. Revenue's contentions: - The revenue's counsel was not in a position to confirm whether the notice under Section 148A(b) or further notices were served on the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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. 4095 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

MR. MOHAMMED NOORULLAH NO.188, MING YEE ROAD, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BUILDING 16, APARTMENT 1703, NEW PUDONG DISTRICT, SHANGHAI, CHINA.

PERMANENT ADDRESS: NO.164, JHBS LAYOUT, SY NO.71B, KADIRENAHALLI, BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE- 560070 PAN ACDPN7166M

REP. BY P O A HOLDER OF THE PETITIONER, SRI VALLABHANENI CHANDRASEKAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O KRISHNA DAS, NO.C2-606, L AND T SOUTH CITY, OFF. BANNERGHATTA ROAD, AREKERE MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE SOUTH – 560076. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S. V., ADV.)

AND:

1.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BANGALORE -560095.

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2.

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110003.

3.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE- 560001.

4.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD INTL. TAXATION 1(1), BANGALORE- 560095.

5.

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT), ROOM NO.317, 3RD FLOOR, E-2 BLOCK, DR. S.P. MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTRE, MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI -110002. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148A(B) OF THE ACT, DATED 17.02.2023 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022-23/1049876014(1) ISSUED BY THE R-1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNX-A 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.E.I.Sanmathi accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

2.

Though the matter is listed for ‘Preliminary Hearing’, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter taken up for final disposal.

3.

Heard learned counsel Sri.Ravi Shankar.S.V., for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi for respondents. Perused the writ petition papers.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is before this Court questioning Section 148 proceedings on the ground that no notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘1961 Act’) was served on the petitioner and the orders passed subsequent are exparte. It is submitted that since 2007, the petitioner is not in India and he works in China. It is specifically contended that notices were sent to previously engaged tax practitioner and it was not to the

e-mail address of the petitioner. Thus, he prays for an opportunity to file objections to Section 148 notice and to participate in the further proceedings.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi is not in a position to say as to whether the notice under Section 148A(b) or further notices issued to the petitioner were served.

6.

On hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, I am of the view that the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to file objections to Section 148A(b) notice and to participate in the proceedings.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is not in India since 2007 and no notices were sent to the e-mail address furnished by the petitioner. If the petitioner was not residing in India and if the notices were sent to the e-mail address of previously engaged tax practitioner of the petitioner, it would not

amount to providing opportunity to the petitioner. Admittedly, as no notices were served on the petitioner either through e-mail or by any mode, petitioner had no opportunity to file objections and to participate in the proceedings. Hence, the following: ORDER

a) Writ petition is allowed.

b) Annexure-A3, order No.ITBA/ AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051515504(1) 28.03.2023; Annexure-A4, notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2022-23/1051515966(1) dated 28.03.2023; Annexure-A5 order bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1061560157(1) 27.02.2024; Annexure-A6, penalty order No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(b)/2024- 25/1067735219(1) 19.08.2024; Annexure-A7 penalty order bearing No.ITBA/ PNL/F/271F/2024-25/1067834070(1) 21.08.2024; and Annexure-A8 penalty order

No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(c)/2024-25/ 1067982210(1) dated 26.08.2024 are quashed.

c) Four weeks time is granted to the petitioner to file objections to Notice issued under Sub- clause (b) of Section 148A of 1961 Act (Annexure-A2). Thereafter, respondents to proceed further in accordance with law.

d) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent No.1 on 17.03.2025.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →