Wp/14598/2024 Of Yallampalli Venkataramanappa Manjunath v. The Income Tax Officer

Digitally signedby V KRISHNALocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV -WRIT PETITION NO. 14598 OF 2024 (TIT)BETWEEN: YALLAMPALLI VENKATARAMANAPPA MANJUNATH, S/O Y. VENKATARAMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 16TH WARD, NEAR HEALTH QUARTERS, BAGEPALLI - 561 207, CHICKBALLAPURA DIST. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. RAMA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND: THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, YASHODA COMPLEX, B.B. ROAD, CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. DILIP, JR. STANDING COUNSEL) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICES DATED 05.03.2024 AND 13.03.2024 ISSUED U/S. 148A(B) OF THE ACT (ANNEXURE-A AND A-1) [ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2023-24/1062022051(1) AND ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2023-24/1062518726(1)] ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-2021 BY THE RESPONDENT AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER I.A.No.1/2024 is allowed. The petitioner is dispensed with the production of certified copy of Annexures-A, A1, B and C. 2. The petitioner has challenged the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), the order passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act as well as the notice issued Section 148 of the Act. 3. It is pointed out that in the identical factual matrix regarding the same assessee, this Court has passed an order in W.P.No.13846/2024 and in the present matter also an order may be passed on the same lines. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not a previous assessee and there was no sufficient opportunity to make out his case to the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act and in the absence of reply made out, order is passed under Section - 3 - 148A (d) of the Act. Various contentions have been raised including that the authority while recording the finding under Section 148A (d) of the Act has not recorded the finding relating to escapement of the income assessable to tax. 5. It is also contended that the procedure even under Section 148A (d) of the Act is to be under the faceless scheme and the procedure prescribed under Section 151A ought to have been followed and accordingly, present proceedings from the very institution are one without jurisdiction. 6. Noticing that the petitioner has not made out his reply, it would be appropriate taking note that the petitioner is not an assessee to afford sufficient opportunity to him to make out his reply to the notice issued Section 148A (b) of the Act. 7. Accordingly, the order under Section 148A (d) of the Act as well as notice issued under Section 148 are set aside. Matter is remitted for fresh consideration to the stage of reply to the notice issued under Section 148A (b) of the Act. Such reply to be made out within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. All contentions raised in the petition including regarding jurisdiction and merits are kept open. Sd/- JUDGE MCR