ABHAYAKUMAR B. PATIL vs. WEALTH TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/106798/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC02006930202316 September 2025Author: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution. The court observed that office objections, despite a prior order dated 11.08.2025, remained uncomplied with. Furthermore, the court noted that the petitioner appeared to be not interested in prosecuting the matter. Consequently, the petition was dismissed on these procedural grounds without delving into the merits of the challenges to the assessment orders or notices. No specific findings were made on the legality of the assessment orders or notices, nor was any relief granted to the petitioner. The court did not leave any issue undecided; rather, it disposed of the petition on account of non-prosecution.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Abhayakumar B. Patil, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad challenging assessment orders and notices of demand issued by the Wealth Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Belagavi. These orders and notices pertained to assessment years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. The petitioner also challenged a letter dated 01-09-2021 issued by the respondent. The case was listed for dismissal, and the court noted that office objections had not been complied with despite a prior order dated 11.08.2025. The court also observed that the petitioner appeared not to be interested in prosecuting the matter.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the assessment orders and notices of demand issued under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2015-16, and the subsequent letter dated 01-09-2021, were legally valid and ought to be quashed. The petitioner sought to quash these orders and notices. The court was also to consider the procedural aspect of non-compliance with office objections and the petitioner's apparent lack of interest in pursuing the case. The specific grounds for challenging the assessment orders and notices were not detailed in the provided text, but the prayer indicates a challenge to their legality. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 16(3),Section 16(5),Section 17,Section 16(1)(i)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 106798 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

ABHAYAKUMAR B.PATIL SON OF SRI , AGED ABOUT YEARS, NO.24, MALINI BASWAN GALLI, HOSUR, SHAHAPUR, BELAGAVI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVIRAJ C.PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

WEALTH TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BELAGAVI, THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 1957, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENT

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO;

A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 16(3) R.W.S.16(5) AND 2011-12 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A.

B) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE

Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

1957 DATED. 28-12-2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A1.

C) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2012-13 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-B.

D) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE DEMAND UNDER SECTION 16(1)(i) O.F THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 2012-13 ANNEXURE-B1.

E) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2013-14 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-C.

F) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE DEMAND UNDER SECTION 16(1)(i) O.F THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 2013-14 ANNEXURE-C1.

G) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2014-15 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-D.

H) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2014-15 ANNEXURE-D1.

I) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2015-16 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-E.

J) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE 2015-16 ANNEXURE-E1.

K) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE LETTER BEARING NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2021-22/1035222042(1) DATED 01-09-2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-F.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

1.

Despite the order dated 11.08.2025 office objections have not been complied with.

2.

It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 3. The petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

GAB CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 67

More judgments on Section 17

All 167 judgments and leading authorities on Section 17 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →