MUKHATAR AHMED ABDUL GANI JAVALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/202356/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC03007781202420 November 2024Author: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. It noted that it was an undisputed fact that the petitioner had not submitted a reply to the Section 148A(b) notice. Considering the petitioner's assertion that his omission was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, and that he would submit a reply if granted another opportunity, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and notices. The matter was remitted back to the first respondent for reconsideration from the stage of submitting the petitioner's reply to the Section 148A(b) notice. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit additional pleadings and documents, which the respondent was directed to consider before proceeding in accordance with the law. The Court expressly left no issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mr. Mukhtar Ahmed Abdul Gani Javali, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench. The petition challenged several notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Department under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Specifically, the petitioner sought to quash a notice under Section 148A(b) dated 08.02.2023, an ex-parte order under Section 148A(d) dated 24.03.2023, a consequent notice under Section 148 dated 24.03.2023, an ex-parte assessment order dated 02.02.2024, and a notice for penalty under Section 274 read with Section 271AAC(1) dated 02.02.2024. The core of the petitioner's grievance was that the initial notice under Section 148A(b) was not received, preventing him from submitting a response.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 08.02.2023, should be quashed on the grounds that it was not received by the petitioner, and consequently, the petitioner could not submit a reply due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148A(b) was not received, and therefore, he was unaware of it. His inability to submit a reply was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. He sought an opportunity to submit his reply and requested that the impugned orders and notices be set aside to allow for this. Revenue's Contention: The respondents (Income Tax Officer and Assessment Unit) contended that there was no merit in the petition and that it was liable to be dismissed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 148,Section 274,Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 202356 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

MR. MUKHATAR AHMED ABDUL GANI JAVALI SON OF MR ABDUL GANI JAVALI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 12/1, A2, FIRST FLOOR M.N RESIDENCY STANDAGE ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BENGALURU-560005, NOW AT ATHANI ROAD, BIJAPUR-586101

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SYED KHAMRUDDIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS GULBLARGA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN SEDAM ROAD, KALABURAGI-585105. 2. ASSESSMENT UNIT REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL JOINT/ DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWARHALAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110003. 3. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL JOINT/ DEPUTY/

Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: High Court Of Karnataka

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWARHALAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI-110003.

…RESPONDENTS (SRI. TIRUMALESH M., ADV. FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO (i) QUASH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148A(b) OF THE I.T ACT DATED 08.02.2023 BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022- 23/1049521673(1) ISSUE BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)

1.

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(i) Quash the notice under section 148A(b) of the I.T Act 08.02.2023 ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022-23/1049521673(1) issue by the 1st respondent (Annexure-A);

(ii) Quash the ex-parte order under section 148A(d) of I.T Act 24.03.2023

ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1051211701(1) issued by the 1st respondent (Annexure-B) and consequent notice under section

24.03.2023 ITBA/AST/S/148-1/2022-23/1051211852(1) issued by the 1st respondent (Annexure-B1;

(iii) Quash the ex-parte assessment order dated 02.02.2024 ITBA/AST/S/147/2023- 24/1060450542(1) (annexure-c) along with computation sheet ITBA /AST/5/319/2023- 24/1060450648(1) (Annexure-C1) and the demand notice dated 02.02.2024 bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/156/2023- 24/1060450683(1) (Annexure-C2) by 2nd respondent.

(iv) Quash the notice for penalty under section 274 read with section 271aac(1) dated 02.02.2024 bearing ITBA/PNL/S/271A (1) (d)-fl/2023-24/1060450701(1) (annexure-c) issued by the 2nd respondent.

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 148A(b)

of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’), dated 08.02.2023 was not received by petitioner and 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 148A(b) 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 148A(b) 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 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 – A dated 08.02.2023 passed under Section 148A(d) of the IT Act and subsequent notice / orders, etc., and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submitting of reply by the petitioner to Section 148A(b) notice and to proceed further in accordance with law. 6. In the result, pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Impugned notices / orders at Annexures-A, B, B1, C, C1, C2 and D are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of submitting of reply to the Show Cause

Notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act at Annexure-A, dated 08.02.2023.

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of 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

SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69

More judgments on Section 148A(b)

All 524 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(b) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →