M/S. DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.33123 OF 2017 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S. DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: NO.180/780, YERANDHALLI VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BEHIND BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BANGALORE-560 058. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. DEEPAK BETHALA, S/O. PRAKASH BETHALA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI H.V.NAGARAJA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S.143(3) READ WITH SECTION 144 AND 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT DTD.29.12.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 I.E., ANNEX-R AND THE

2 CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.07 DTD.29.12.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 I.E., ANNEXURE-S AND ETC.

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned Assessment order at Annexure – R dated 29.12.2016 passed by respondent under Section 143 (3) r/w 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, IT Act) as well as consequential Demand Notice dated 29.12.2016 issued by the respondent for the Assessment year 2011-12 at Annexure – S. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record and considering all the rival submissions will indicate that though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, despite the petitioner submitting a detailed objection and documents as can be seen from replies / objections at Annexure – B dated

3 15.04.2016, Annexure – D dated 16.08.2016, Annexure – E dated 03.10.2016, Annexure – G dated 21.10.2016, Annexure – J dated 17.11.2016 and Annexure – L dated 28.11.2016 as well as Annexure – P and Q dated 21.12.2016 and 26.12.2016, respectively, respondent No.1 has not properly or correctly considered or appreciated the said objections / replies and the documents submitted by the petitioner and has proceeded to pass the impugned assessment order, which is an unreasoned and non- speaking order without considering or appreciating the several contentions urged by the petitioner or documents produced by him or hearing the petitioner and consequently, the impugned order being violative of principles of natural justice, the same deserves to be quashed and the matter remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law within a stipulated time frame. 4. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i. Petition is hereby allowed.

4 ii. The impugned Assessment order at Annexure – R dated 29.12.2016 passed by respondent as well as consequential Demand Notice dated 29.12.2016 issued by the respondent at Annexure – S are hereby quashed. iii. Matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv. All rival contentions urged by the parties are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. v. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional objections, replies, etc., along with the additional documents, if any, to the respondent, which shall be considered prior to passing of the impugned order

5 within the time period as stipulated supra. SD/- JUDGE SV