By Kum/Smt. Sindhu v. Commissioner Of Income

Digitallysigned byCHAITHANYAKLocation:High Court ofKarnataka IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN -WRIT PETITION NO. 14311 OF 2024 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S. SURABHI CHITS LTD., HAVING CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO.5, 2 FLOOR, GAJENDRA TOWERS, 11 MAIN, 4 BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT,1956 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. DILIP B.M. …PETITIONER (BY KUM/SMT. SINDHU V. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SIVARAMA KRISHNANAN AND SRI. M. SIVA SANKARAN.,ADVOCATES) AND: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 11 BANGALORE. ROOM NO.322, 3 FLOOR, ROOM NO.322, 3 FLOOR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT, COMMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) BENGALURU-560 001. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT, COMMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:48419 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF R-1 DATED 27.01.2024 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-11/BNG-10217/2012-13, CIT(A)-11/BNG-10387/2013-14, CIT(A)-11/BNG-11040/2014-15, CIT(A)-11/BNG-11108/2015-16, CIT(A)-11/BNG-10834/2016-17, CIT(A)-11/BNG-10807/2017-18 AND CIT(A)-11/BNG-12687/2018-19 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioner in the instant writ petition is challenging the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 dated 27.01.2024 vide Annexure-A to the writ petition and the consequential notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act by respondent No.2. 2. In the course of the arguments the short question raised by the petitioner is that they have not given sufficient opportunity to present their case before respondent No.1 and if sufficient opportunity is given they would prove that the proceedings initiated against them is not sustainable. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondents submits that though notices were issued to the petitioner they have not appeared and participated in the proceedings. 4. Under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if opportunity is given to the petitioner to present its case before respondent No.1. Hence, the following Order: (i) Impugned order dated 27.01.2024 in Appeal Nos.CIT(A)-11/BNG-10217/2012-13, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 10387/ 2013-14, CIT(A)-11/BNG-11040/2014-15, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 11108/2015-16, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 10834/2016-17, CIT(A)-11/BNG-10807/2017-18 and CIT(A)-11/BNG-12687/2018-19 at Annexure-A passed by respondent No.1 are hereby set aside. CIT(A)-11/BNG-10217/2012-13, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 10387/ 2013-14, CIT(A)-11/BNG-11040/2014-15, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 11108/2015-16, CIT(A)-11/BNG- 10834/2016-17, CIT(A)-11/BNG-10807/2017-18 and CIT(A)-11/BNG-12687/2018-19 at Annexure-A passed by respondent No.1 are hereby set aside. (ii) Notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act vide Annexure-B to the writ petition is hereby set aside. Tax Act vide Annexure-B to the writ petition is hereby set aside. (iii) Petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No.1 on 10.12.2024 without further notice and it shall co-operate with respondent No.1 for quick disposal of the case without seeking any adjournments and respondent No.1 after hearing the petitioner shall pass appropriate orders. No.1 on 10.12.2024 without further notice and it shall co-operate with respondent No.1 for quick disposal of the case without seeking any adjournments and respondent No.1 after hearing the petitioner shall pass appropriate orders. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE