Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.18426/2022 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
SRI TALIHALLA DEVEGOWDA RAJEGOWDA S/O LATE DEVEGOWDA AGED 64 YEARS R/AT BASAPURA PLANTATION RADABAILU, KADAVANTHI POST CHIKMAGALUR-577136.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI M.V.SESHACHALA, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADV.)
AND:
ASSESSING OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE NO.412-413, 1ST FLOOR OPP.METRO PILLAR NO.793 DWARKA MOR NEW DELHI-110059.
INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 I.T.OFFICE, CHIKMAGALUR COURT ROAD CHIKMAGALUR-577101.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC BUILDING
2 KORAMANGALA, 80 FEET ROAD BANGALORE-560095.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI DILIP M., ADV.C)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.03.2022 BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/10412244681(1) ANNEXURE-E4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 PASSED BY THE R1 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order dated 22.03.2022 bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/ 147/2021-22/1041224400 (1) Annexure-E3 & demand notice u/s. 156 of the IT Act dated 22.03.2022 bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021- 22/1041224468 (1) Annexure-E4 for the Assessment year 2013-14 passed by the first respondent.
b. Issue a writ of mandamus directing that the Assessing Officer passing the assessment order in the case of M/s. Pragathi Developers for A.Y. 2013-14 should consider and pass assessment orders for the current Assessment Year 2013-14 in the case of partner petitioner.
c. Issue such other Writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of material on record, in particular impugned assessment order dated 22.03.2022 will indicate that the same is an exparte assessment order, which has been passed without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present writ petition.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
It is relevant to state that the petitioner is a Partner of M/s.Pragathi Developers who had
4 preferred W.P.No.20113/2021 which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.08.2022 and the matter remitted back to the authorities for reconsideration afresh.
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, in view specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that it was not possible for him to respond to the aforesaid show-cause notice nor contest the proceedings due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause coupled with the fact that the impugned assessment order is an exparte assessment order, without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned assessment order at Annexure-E3 and consequential demand notice at Annexure-E4, both dated 22.03.2022 and remit the matter back to the
5 respondents to reconsider afresh, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, I also deem it just and appropriate to reserve liberty in favour of the petitioner to file/submit suitable application before the authorities for consolidation, clubbing or transferring of both the cases to be disposed together, in accordance with law.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
Petition is hereby allowed. The impugned assessment order vide Annexure-E3 and consequential notice vide Annexure-E4, both dated 22.03.2022 are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.
6 Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file responses/replies, pleadings along with the documents before the respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further, in accordance with law. Liberty is also reserved in favour of the petitioner to file suitable application(s) before the respondents seeking consolidation of the present proceedings along with proceedings in relation to W.P.No.20113/2021 in relation to M/s.Pragathi Developers of which, the petitioner is a party for the purpose of consolidating, clubbing and transferring both matter to a single assessing authority for disposal together, in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE
mpk/-* CT:bms