Wp/14392/2024 Of Kiran Kumar v. Income Tax Officer

Digitallysigned byCHAITHANYAKLocation:High Court ofKarnataka IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN -WRIT PETITION NO. 14392 OF 2024 (TIT) BETWEEN: KIRAN KUMAR S/O NAGARAJA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT NO 350, 2 CROSS JAGAJYOTHINAGAR, NAGADEVANAHALLI, JNANABHARATHI POST, BANGALORE 560 056 PAN NO. …PETITIONER (BY JEEVAN J NEELANGI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BALRAM R RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2)(3) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA 560 095 2. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI, 2 FLOOR, E -RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI 110 003 (BY SRI. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRYING TO 1. DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONERS CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF BE PLEASED TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER SECTION 143 (3) R.W.S. 254 R.W.S. 144B OF ACT DATED 09.02.2024 IN DIN.ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1060686357(1) (ANNEXURE-N) AND NOTICE DEMAND ISSUED U/S 156 OF THE ACT DATED 09.02.2024 IN DIN ITBA/AST/S/156/2023.24/1060686360(1) ANNEXURE(1) FOR THE AY 2015-16. AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. Aggrieved by the assessment order for the year 2015-16 (vide Annexure-N to the writ petition) passed by respondent No.2, the present writ petition is filed by the assessee. The case of the assessee is that, he had submitted a reply to the notices issued and he produced an explanation and several documents to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the persons from whom he has borrowed the money. However, respondent No.2 disregarding the said reply to the notices and erroneously holding that the assessee has failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the persons from whom cash was claimed to have been received, has passed the impugned order adverse to the interest of the assessee. On the said ground, the petitioner prays that the assessment order may be set aside and the matter may be remanded back to respondent No.2 for fresh consideration. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents justifies the impugned order and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. However, he is unable to dispute the fact that subsequent to the notices issued, the assessee has indeed given the reply and also has submitted certain documents and that the impugned order has been passed on the ground that there was no compliance to the notices and the assessee failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the persons from whom cash was claimed to have been received and that there is no proper reasoning assigned to disbelieve the reply and the documents produced by the assessee. 3. As the reply of the assessee and the documents produced by him have not been considered by respondent No.2 while passing the impugned order, the impugned order dated 09.02.2024 vide Annexure-N to the writ petition, passed by respondent No.2 is hereby set aside and the matter stands remanded back to respondent No.2, to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner as well as the documents produced by him and pass a speaking order in accordance with law. 4. All contentions are kept open. Consequently, demand notice issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2015-16 is hereby set aside. 5. It is needless to state that the petitioner is at liberty to produce such additional documents as he so desires to - 5 - respondent No.2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is hereby disposed off. 4. All contentions are kept open. Consequently, demand notice issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2015-16 is hereby set aside. 5. It is needless to state that the petitioner is at liberty to produce such additional documents as he so desires to - 5 - respondent No.2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is hereby disposed off. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35 SNN