Wp/143620/2020 Of Daivajna Pattina Souharda Sahakari Niyamita v. Income Tax Officer, Ward

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKADHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF MARCH, 2021 BEFORE. THE HON‘BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM;W.P.NO.143620/ 2020 (RES) BETWEEN DAIVAJINA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITADAIVAGNYA PATINA SAHAKARI, P.B.ROAD,|NEAR NTTF, DHARWAD-580001,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,SHRI VINAYAK S/O GANGADHAR SHET,AGE : 49 YEARS, OCC: CEO,R/O HOUSE NO.73, HEMANT NAGAR, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI SANGRAM S.KULKARNI & SRI S.M.PATIL, ADVS. ) AND INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1(7),HUBLI, C.R.BUILDING, NAVANAGAR,HUBBALLI-580025. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 2276 &22/7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING THIS HON'BLECOURT TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOR AY 2017-18 VIDEANNEXURE-ABEARINGNO.ITBA/AST/144/2019-20/|1021726944(1) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT INCOME TAX,OFFICER WARD-1(5), HUBLI ON 05.12.2019 AND SUCH OTHER|RELIEFS. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THECOURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed being aggrievedDy tne order passed by tne respondent-assessing|autnority on 04.02.2020 as per Annexure-D. — 2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the|respondent-Assessing Authority passed an assessment.order on 05.12.2019 as per Annexure-A. Pursuant to}the assessment order, the respondent issued a notice of|demand dated 05.12.2019 calling upon the petitioner to|pay sum of Rs.1,48,67,8/79/-. 3.Tne grievance of the petitioner is that ne Nadfiled stay application before the respondent-Assessing|Autnority. Tne said application is decided by therespondent-AssessinqgAuthoritywithout|affordingopportunity to the present petitioner nerein. | 4Principlesof.natura]justice.involves|procedural requirement of fairness. Essentially, natural|justice requires that a person receive a fair andunbiased hearing before a decision is made that will|negatively affect nis. Tne three main requirements of natural justice tnat must be met in every case are,|adequate notice, fair hearing and no bias. In _ thiDackground, there is absolutely no fair Nearing and the|order under challenge is arbitrary and the same is|passed|without.affordingan)opportunity|CO|the|petitioner. 5.I nave perused the order under cnallenge. I|would find that the respondent-Assessing Authority has|passed an order without affording opportunity to the.petitioner and on this short point, tne order under|challenge passed by the respondent-Assessing Authorityas per Annexure-D is contrary to the provisions of the)Act. Accordingly, the order under challenge is not at all.sustainable and the same is liable to be quashed by this|Court. 6.I am of the view that the respondent-AssessingAuthority|needsCO|hear.tne|presentpetitioner and thereafter pass appropriate order on the|Said application filed Dy the present petitioner herein. For the reasons stated supra, I pass the following: EM/- * ORDER: 1+The writ petition ts allowed. =+Theimpugnedorder.passed|DYthe|respondent-assessing|autnorityaS|Det|Annexure-D is quasned. respondent-assessing|autnorityaS|Det|Annexure-D is quasned. 0+Tnematterstandsremittedimetne|respondent-AssessinqgAuthority.Tne|respondent-Assessing Autnority is directed.to hear the petitioner and thereafter pass.appropriate orders on the stay application.in accordance with law within eight weeks|from the date of receipt of copy of this.order.respondent-AssessinqgAuthority.Tne|respondent-Assessing Autnority is directed.to hear the petitioner and thereafter pass.appropriate orders on the stay application.in accordance with law within eight weeks|from the date of receipt of copy of this.order. For the reasons stated supra, I pass the following: EM/- * ORDER: 1+The writ petition ts allowed. =+Theimpugnedorder.passed|DYthe|respondent-assessing|autnorityaS|Det|Annexure-D is quasned. respondent-assessing|autnorityaS|Det|Annexure-D is quasned. 0+Tnematterstandsremittedimetne|respondent-AssessinqgAuthority.Tne|respondent-Assessing Autnority is directed.to hear the petitioner and thereafter pass.appropriate orders on the stay application.in accordance with law within eight weeks|from the date of receipt of copy of this.order.respondent-AssessinqgAuthority.Tne|respondent-Assessing Autnority is directed.to hear the petitioner and thereafter pass.appropriate orders on the stay application.in accordance with law within eight weeks|from the date of receipt of copy of this.order. 7+The petitioner had the benefit of interim.order before this Court. Hence, I deem it.Tit|CO|airect|tne|respondent-Assessing Authority not to take coercive steps till the.stay application is decided in accidence.with law..order before this Court. Hence, I deem it.Tit|CO|airect|tne|respondent-Assessing Authority not to take coercive steps till the.stay application is decided in accidence.with law.. Sd/-.JUDGE