Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.20280/2022 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
JUPITER CAPITAL PRIVATE LTD (SUCCESSOR OF M/S ASIANET TV HOLDING PRIVATE LTD) 54, RICHMOND ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 025 COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. M.S.RAM, S/O.MR. SHRI MATHEVEN SHIVRAM AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS)
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI NARENDRA KUMAR J. JAIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
INCOME-TAX OFFICER
NATIONAL FACELESS-ASSESSMENT CENTRE
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR
E-RAMP, JAWARHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM
DELHI - 110 003.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
CIRCLE 4(1)(1)
BMTC BUILDING, KORAMANGALA
- 2 -
BENGALURU - 560 001.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.DILEEP, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ITBA/AST/147/2021-22/1040863542(1), DATED 16.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE LEARNED FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B FOR AY 2017-18, ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs; "A. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise the impugned order vide ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1040863542(1), dated 16.03.2022 issued by the Learned First Respondent under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B for AY 2017-18, enclosed in Annexure-A.
B. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise the impugned demand notice under Section 156 of the Act vide
- 3 -
(ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1040863615(1), dated 16.03.2022 issued by the Learned First Respondent for the AY 2017-18, enclosed in Annexure-B.
C. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise the impugned Penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s.270A of the Act vide (ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2021-22/1040863732 (1) dated 16.03.2022 issued by the Learned First Respondent for the AY 2014-15, enclosed in Annexure-C.
D. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise the impugned Penalty Order under Section 274 r.w.s.271(a)(b) of the Act vide ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(b)/2022- 23/1045449733(1)- dated 13.09.2022 issued by the Learned Second Respondent for the AY 2014-15, enclosed in Annexure-C1.
E. Quash as far as the Petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise the impugned Penalty Order under Section 274 r.w.s 271F of the Act vide ITBA/PNL/F/271F/2022-23/1045624105(1)
- 4 -
dated 16.09.2022 issued by the Learned Second Respondent for the AY 2014-15, enclosed in Annexure-C2.
F. Direct the Learned Respondent to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to file submissions/documents demonstrating that interest income is already offered to tax and provide opportunity of personal hearing."
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the order dated 15.04.2010 passed by this Court in Company Petition No.22/2010, in which, scheme of amalgamation of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited and M/s Jupiter Entertainment Ventures Private Limited along with the petitioner herein i.e., Jupiter Capital Private Limited was sanctioned by this Court. It is submitted that pursuant to the said order, the scheme of amalgamation was also approved
- 5 -
by the Hon'ble High Court at Bombay and certified copy in this regard was filed before the Registrar of Companies and necessary corrections were made. It is further submitted that due to oversight and inadvertence, the details of Permanent Account Number (PAN Number) etc, of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited which stood merged and amalgamated with M/s. Jupiter Capital Private Limited was not informed/intimated to the respondent- Authority from which, the Assessee received the interest from the Fixed Deposit. On account of non-intimation of amalgamation to the Bank of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited, all communications including the Notices dated 29.01.2022 and 11.02.2022 were issued only in respect of PAN Number of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited, which did not exist after amalgamation. It is therefore submitted that under these circumstances, the petitioner was not in a position to respond to the aforesaid notices, which have been made the basis to pass the impugned order by the respondents without affording or providing an opportunity to the petitioner and as such, the impugned Assessment Order is violative of principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed.
- 6 -
Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
A perusal of the material on record, in particular, the final order dated 15.04.2010 will clearly indicate that M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited has stood amalgamated with the petitioner herein, who is a transferee company. However, on account of the petitioner not intimating the Banks i.e., Yes Bank Limited and Andhra Bank Limited, the income received in relation to the Pan Account of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited, which did not exist any longer after amalgamation has been shown as the income received by the petitioner herein, since the Banks did not have requisite information regarding amalgamation of M/s. Asianet TV Holdings Private Limited with the petitioner company. It is under these circumstances the petitioner contends that he was not in a position to respond to the Notices, which culminated in the impugned exparte order passed against the petitioner.
- 7 -
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the undisputed fact that the petitioner has not responded to the aforesaid Notices dated 21.01.2022, 29.01.2022, 11.02.2022, 18.02.2022 and 04.03.2022, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that he did not receive the said Notices and if, one more opportunity is given to him, he would reply along with the relevant documents, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned Assessment Order at Annexure-A and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, Annexures- A, B, C, C1 and C2 are hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law after providing one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit his reply/response along with the documents to the Notices issued by the respondents.
Liberty is also reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit pleadings, documents etc to respondent No.1, who
- 8 -
shall consider the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, petition stands disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE