Wp/15179/2023 Of Smt. A . Saraswathi v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

Digitally signedby VIJAYA PLocation: HighCourt ofKarnataka -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV|(WRIT PETITION NO. 15179 OF 2023 (TIT) BETWEEN: 1.SMT. A. SARASWATHLE WIFE OF MR. K. NARAYANASWAMY,|AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,|RESIDING AT NO. 197,SAMETHANAHALLY VILLAGEHOSKOTE TALUK,|BANGALORE - 560 O6/.AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,|RESIDING AT NO. 197,SAMETHANAHALLY VILLAGEHOSKOTE TALUK,|BANGALORE - 560 O6/. _ PETITIONER| (BY SRI. SYED KHAMRUDDIN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1.PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXKARNATAKA AND GOA REGIONGROUND FLOOR, CR BUILDING,|NO.1, QUEENS ROAD,KARNATAKA AND GOA REGIONGROUND FLOOR, CR BUILDING,|NO.1, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 OOL 2.PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-Z.BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD.6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE|KORAMANGALA,BENGALURU - 560 O95.BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD.6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE|KORAMANGALA,BENGALURU - 560 O95. 3.INCOME TAX OFFICER|WARD 4(2) (1), BANGALORE,WARD 4(2) (1), BANGALORE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD. 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE| KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 095.. VAASSESSMENT UNIT.INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD.6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE|KORAMANGALABENGALURU - 560 O95. (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI., ADVOCATE) .. RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 2260 OF THECONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED|NOTICEDTD19/4/2021BEARING DINNO.ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032518465(1) ISSUED BY THER-3 (ANNEXURE-A) AND DOCUMENT DTD 26.5.2022 BEARING|DIN NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23 /1043173901(1) ISSUED BY THE R-3 (ANNEXURE-A1) AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Learned Counsel Sri Sushal Tiwari appearing on|benalf of the respondent would submit that the matter is)proceeded and assessment order being passed and tne} present writ petition has been filed at a belated stage and)nothing prevented the petitioner from approaching this_ -3- Hon ble court at an earlier point of time if there was any.jurisdictional error. — 2. Learned counsel has also submitted that therewas no challenge on the ground that is now raised asregards re-opening of the proceedings and accordingly|contentions are being advanced at a belated stage after.the assessment order is passed and that the matter is atthe stage of issuing notice regarding penalty order. | 3. However, any objection which goes to the root ofthe matter relating to the infirmity in the initial noticewhicn is the premise on wnich proceedings are sougnt to be re-opened could be entertained even at a later stage.It is noticed that as notice is issued beyond three yearsfrom the end of the assessment year, the sanctionhowever is not obtained of the authority under Section|151 (ii) of the Act. As such, objection relates to the|competency for issuing of notice under Section 148A can.be entertained even though at a later stage, andaccordingly such contention stands rejected. -4.- NC: 2023:KHC:26222WP No. 15179 of 2023 4Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The noticedated 19.04.2021 at Annexure-A, order dated 25.07.2022|at Annexure-B, notice dated 25.07.2022 at Annexure-C|and order dated 26.05.2023 at Annexure-F are set aside.Liberty is reserved to the respondents to initiate fresh|proceedings as is permissible in law as regards to the.subject matter of the present proceedings. All contentionsare kept open. Sd/-|JUDGE|