Wp/19366/2021 Of M/S Bhima Jewellers v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR);WRIT PETITION No.19366 OF 2021 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S. BHIMA JEWELLERS,REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,ORI. VISHNU SHARAN K. BRAT,SON OF SRI. B. KRISHNAN,AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,NO.122/C, 8 MAIN, 3 BLOCK,JAYANAGAR,BANGALORE-560 0171. PETITIONER (BY SRI ANNAMALAI 8., ADVOCATE) | AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX.(CENTRAL), BENGALURU, CENTRAL REVENUES BUILDING,QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 0071.(CENTRAL), BENGALURU, CENTRAL REVENUES BUILDING,QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 0071. 2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL RANGE-3, ROOM NO.308, 3 FLOOR,NO.46, INVESTIGATION BUILDING, M.G. ROAD,CHENNAI-600 034.CENTRAL RANGE-3, ROOM NO.308, 3 FLOOR,NO.46, INVESTIGATION BUILDING, M.G. ROAD,CHENNAI-600 034. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), NO.46, INVESTIGATIONBUILDING, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI-600 034.CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), NO.46, INVESTIGATIONBUILDING, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI-600 034. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) | THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 22/7.OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THENOTIFICATION PASSED UNDER JHE PROVISION OFSECTION 127 OF THE ACI BY THE R-1 DID 07.07.2071|REFERRED VIDE ANNX-A AND DIRECT IN THE NATURE OF PROHIBITION RESTRAINING R-2 AND 3 FROM TAKING ANYFURTHER ACTION IN PURSUANCE OF THE I[MPUGNEDNOTIFICATION PASSED UNDER THE PROVISION OFSECTION 127 OF THE ACT BY THE R-1 DID 07.07.2071|REFERRED AS ANNX-A ELSE THE PETITIONER WILLSUFFER GRAVE AND IRREPARABLE LOSS. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING.IN 'B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THEFOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of theimpugned notification at Annexure-A dated 07.07.2021|passed by respondent No.1 under Section 12/7 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the I.T. Act") and for otherreliefs.| 2 |Heard learned counsel for the petitioner,|learned counsel for the respondents and perused the|material on record. 3 |In|aqdaition{foreiteratingthe variouscontentions urged in the petition and referring to the|documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for|the petitioner invites my attention to the impugned|notification at Annexure-A in order to point out that aperusal of the said notification will indicate that the sameis | not.Inconformitywiththe mandatoryrequirements/ingredients of Section 127 of the I.T. Act, no|reason muchless valid or cogent have been assigned by|respondent Nol.1 before passing the impugned order. It Is|therefore submitted that apart from other grounds, which|vitiates the impugned order, the impugned order which Is non-speaking, cryptic and wunreasoned order withoutassigning any reasons, whatsoever, Is illegal and arbitrary|and the same deserves to be quashed. A |Per.contra,learnedcounsel|for.tnerespondents would support the impugned order and would|submit that there is no merit in the petition and the sameIs |llable to be dismissecad 5 |Though several contentions nave been urged|by both sides in support of their respective claims, aperusal of the impugned notification will indicate that the|same is not in conformity with the mandatory requirements|of Section 12/7 of the |.IT. Act, In aS much as no reasonsmucniess, valid or cogent reasons have been assigned by respondent No.1 in the impugned order, so as to enable| him to issue the impugned notification as against the|petitioner. So also, no material is available on record to |indicate the reasons as to why the Impugned notification|was Issued under Section 12/7 of the |.7. Act. Under these|circumstances, In view of the material on record Including|the impugned order, which indicates that the mandatory|requirements/ingredients of Section 12/7 of the I|.T. Act navnot been followed/fulfilled prior to issuance of the impugnednotification, | am of the considered opinion that the|impugned notification deserves to be quashed. | him to issue the impugned notification as against the|petitioner. So also, no material is available on record to |indicate the reasons as to why the Impugned notification|was Issued under Section 12/7 of the |.7. Act. Under these|circumstances, In view of the material on record Including|the impugned order, which indicates that the mandatory|requirements/ingredients of Section 12/7 of the I|.T. Act navnot been followed/fulfilled prior to issuance of the impugnednotification, | am of the considered opinion that the|impugned notification deserves to be quashed. | 6.|in the result, | pass the following: ORDER (1)Tne petition is allowed. (il)The impugned notification No.31/Misc/Centralisation/ Pr.CIT(C)/2021-22 dated 07.07.2021 vide Annexure- A is hereby quashed; however, liberty is reserved infavourOTtnerespondentstOinitiate|sucn|proceedings In accordance with law.favourOTtnerespondentstOinitiate|sucn|proceedings In accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE| BmMm