Wp/14528/2024 Of Intellicar Telematics Private Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

Digitally signedby VIJAYA PLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19 DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV -WRIT PETITION NO. 14528 OF 2024 (TRES) BETWEEN: INTELLICAR TELEMATICS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 NO.1216/1217, 1ST AND 3RD FLOOR KCN COMPLEX, 11TH A 24TH MAIN SECTOR 1, HSR LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 102 REP BY ITS DIRECTOR KARAN MAKHIJA S/F PRAKASH MAKHIJA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHANKAR S. SR. ADV., FOR SRI AKANKSH ASHOK.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1)(1) BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 095. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BANGALORE - 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI THIRUMALESH M, ADV.) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148A(B) OF THE ACT DATED 21/03/2024 OF ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 BY THE R1 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2023-24/1063066343(1) HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER 1. Sri. M. Thirumalesh, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner is calling in question the validity of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 at Annexure-A1 as well as the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act at Annexure-A2 and notice under Section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A3. 3. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in response to the notice at Annexure-A1 under Section 148A(b) of the Act, reply was made out, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-C. It is further submitted that the said reply was detailed and reconciliation of turn over as per Income Tax Return and Form 26AS was sought to be demonstrated by detailed information furnished. It is submitted that the petitioner is admittedly an Income Tax assessee while the order at Annexure-A2 refers to the assessee as being a non-filer. Further, it is submitted that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act has not dealt with the explanation and cryptically disposed of the objections without entering into the merits of such submissions. 4. Perused the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. the observation at Sl.No.1 that assessee is a non-filer is contrary to the records. Insofar as the remaining explanation and reconciliation between Income Tax Return and Form 26AS declaration, the same has not been adverted to or dealt with. The order under Section 148A(d) of the Act is a starting point of reassessment proceedings as it is followed by notice under Section 148 of the Act. If that were to be so, the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act is required to be passed after due application of mind and taking note of the cryptic manner of disposal of the objections as is evident at paragraph No.4 of the order at Annexure-A2. The matter requires reconsideration. 5. Accordingly, the order at Annexure-A2 under Section 148A(d) of the Act is set-aside. Consequent notice under Section 148 of the Act at Annexure-A3 is set-aside. The matter is relegated to the stage of considering the reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The respondent is directed to reconsider the explanation at Annexure - C and pass a fresh order, after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner. 6. Petitioner is also at liberty to substantiate their reply and put forth clarifications if sought for by the concerned authority. 7. All contentions are kept open. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- JUDGE DN