SRI. MUKRAMULLA ASADULLA KHAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/15062/2022HC KarnatakaKAHC01033898202222 September 2022Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the impugned assessment orders and remitted the matter back to the respondent. The petitioner was granted liberty to file their response, which the respondent must consider after providing a personal hearing.

What were the facts?

The petitioner sought to set aside notices issued under Section 148 and subsequent assessment orders for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15. The petitioner claimed they were not granted sufficient opportunity to respond due to being out of station.

What were the issues?

Whether the petitioner was denied a reasonable opportunity to present their case before the assessment orders were passed. Whether the assessment orders were passed without jurisdiction or in violation of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.15062 OF 2022 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. MUKRAMULLA ASADULLA KHAN S/O LATE SRI ASADULLA KHAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.374, M K VILLA M G ROAD, NEHRU PARK UDAYAGIRI MYSORE-571019. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANI.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) ’AAYAKAR BHAWAN’ NO.21/16, RESIDENCY ROAD, NAZARBAD, MYSORE-570008

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE )

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032002615(1) DTD: 31.3.2021 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AT ANNEXURE-E AND NOTICE BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2020- 21/1032002619(1) DTD 31.3.2021 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AT ANNEXURE-F, BOTH ARE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE RESPONDENT AS ONE WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND ETC.

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

2 ORDER

In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to set-aside the notice bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032002615(1) dated 31.03.2021 for the assessment year 2013-14 at Annexure-E and notice bearing No.ITBA/AST/ S/148/2020-21/1032002619(1) dated 31.3.2021 for the assessment year 2014-15 at Annexure-F, both are issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the respondent as one without jurisdiction;

b) Issue a writ of certiorari or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to set-aside the assessment order bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042214820(1) dated 31.3.2022 for the assessment year 2013-14 at Annexure-K and assessment order bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042283951(1) dated 31.3.2022 for the assessment year 2014-15 at Annexure-L, both are passed u/s 147 r/w Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the respondent along with the respective demand notices for each year as void or barred by limitation, lacking jurisdiction and or in violation of principles of natural justice;

c) Alternatively, issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus to afford reasonable opportunity to petitioner to rebut the proposals and to pass appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law for both the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 and

3 d) To pass any other order or direction as deemed fit by this Honourable Court, to meet the ends of justice and equity.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3.

The material on record discloses that pursuant to the notices dated 17.11.2021, 17.12.2021 and 11.03.2022 issued by the respondent, the petitioner was not in a position to file the response along with the documents since he was not in station and a request was made by the Accounts Assistant of the petitioner in this regard. Despite the said request being made by the petitioner, the respondent issued further notice on 20.03.2022 and proceeded to hurriedly pass the impugned ex-parte assessment order dated 31.03.2022 and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

5.

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the fact that no sufficient or reasonable opportunity was granted to the petitioner to submit his response / reply along with the documents despite request in this regard having been made by the petitioner through his Accounts Assistant, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned assessment order at Annexures – K and N and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed.

5 (ii) Impugned assessment orders at Annexures – K and L both dated 31.03.2022 are hereby set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file his response / reply along with the documents to Annexures – E and F, which shall be considered by the respondent after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, to conclude the proceedings, in accordance with law. (v) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →