Wp/20093/2021 Of Sri Purushotham Munipillappa v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021. BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR W P.No.20093/2021.C/W%W.P.No.20005/2021(TIT) In W.P.No.20093/2021 BETWEEN SRI. PURUSHOTHAM MUNIPILLAPPA,S/O MUNI PILLAPPA,|AGED 50 YEARS,R/AT No.1 7/6CQAL LAYOUT, NEAR UCO BANK,SAHAKAR NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092| _.. PETITIONE (BY SRI. M.V.SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARINGFOR SRI.LARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADV.) AND( 41DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE - 560 001.C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE - 560 001. 2 _PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE,CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 0071. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. E.L.SANMATHI ALONG WITHSRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2), THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &22/ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHTHE EXPARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.09.2021.PASSED BY R-1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20.PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H5, AND DEMAND NOTICE}DATED 29.09.2021 ANNEXURE-HB6, ETC. in W.P.No.20005/2021 BETWEEN ORI. PURUSHOTHAM MUNIPILLAPPA,|S/O MUNI PILLAPPA,|AGED 50 YEARS,R/AT No.17/6,CQAL LAYOUT, NEAR UCO BANK,SAHAKAR NAGAR,BANGALORE - 560 092.... PETITIONE (BY SRI. M.V.SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARINGFOR SRI.LARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADV.) AND 1_|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.BANGALORE - 560 001. aPRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 O07. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. E.LSANMATHI ALONG WITRH |SRI. A.V.ARAVIND, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2) | THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &22/ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHTHE EXPARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.09.2021.PASSED BY R1FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H5, AND DEMAND NOTICE}UNDER SECTION 156 OF [HE IT ACI DATED 28.09.2021.ANNEXURE-HE6. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS)DAY, [THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER 1]In W.P.No.20093/2021, petitioner has sought for the|following relief: ‘Issue a Writ of certiorari to quasn the exparteassessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by firstrespondent for the Assessment Year 2019-20 producedas Annexure-H5, bearing No.lTBA/AST/M/153A/2021-22/103599348/(1) and demand notice u/s. 156 of tne ITActdatea29.09.7071bearing|No.ITBA/AS T/S/156/2021-22/103599349(1) AnnexureHo. 2.In W.P.No.20005/2021, petitioner has sougnt for the followingrelieT: "Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the exparteassessment order dated 28.09.2021 passed by firstresponaent for the Assessment Year 2013-14 proagucedas Annexure-Ho, bearing No.! IBA/AS1T/S/193A/20222/1035988/742(1) and demand notice u/s. 156 of the ITActcated28.09.7071bearing|No.1 TE BA/AS 1/8/196/2021-22/1035988 /5Annexure-Ho6. DD Heard Sri. M.V.Seshachala, learned Senior Counsel for |ori Aravind Chavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and SriE.|.sanmathni, learned counsel along with sri K.V.Aravind,learned counsel for respondents. — 2.In W.P.No.20005/2021, petitioner has sougnt for the followingrelieT: "Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the exparteassessment order dated 28.09.2021 passed by firstresponaent for the Assessment Year 2013-14 proagucedas Annexure-Ho, bearing No.! IBA/AS1T/S/193A/20222/1035988/742(1) and demand notice u/s. 156 of the ITActcated28.09.7071bearing|No.1 TE BA/AS 1/8/196/2021-22/1035988 /5Annexure-Ho6. DD Heard Sri. M.V.Seshachala, learned Senior Counsel for |ori Aravind Chavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and SriE.|.sanmathni, learned counsel along with sri K.V.Aravind,learned counsel for respondents. — 3Tnougn several contentions Nave been urged by the.petitioner In support of nis contention, the material on recora, Inparticular, the notice dated 11.09.2021 will Indicate that the|petitioner was called upon to furnish information, details, etc., onor before 17.09.2021. It Is the grievance of the petitioner thatdespite ne being ready and willing to furnisn the Informationelectronically In E-proceeding througn his account In e-Tilingwebsite of the Department, he was not in a position to do so onaccount of several tecnnical glitcnes in the website as evidentfrom Annexures-J1 to J6, all of which establish that manypersons iInciuding the petitioner were not In a position to furnishthe details/information as sought for from them. It is, therefore,contended that the impugned assessment orders dated28.09.2021 and 29.09.2021, by which date tecnnical glitches nad.not been rectified and without providing any opportunity to the petitioner is violative of principles of natural justice and the)impugned assessment order and demand notice deserve to bequasned. APer contra, learned counsel for the respondents, in.aadaition to supporting the impugned assessment order, submitsthat a perusal of the assessment order will indicate that thepetitioner was called upon to Tile objections/details on or before17.09.2021 and since the petitioner did not ao so, respondents|proceeded to pass the impugned order wnich does not warrantany interference by this Court in the present petition. 5 _As _ rightly contended by the learned Senior Counseappearing for the petitioner, a perusal of the material on record,|In particular, Annexures-J1 to JO will Indicate that thougn thepetitioner was called upon to file returns/objections/response on)or before 17.09.2021, the petitioner could not do so on account ofseveraltecnnicalglitchesInthe.website/portalOT|tne|respondents, whicn prevented the petitioner and acted as animpediment and obstacle for the petitioner to respond the noticedated 11.09.2021 within the stipulated period as indicated In the| notice or even up to the date of impugned assessment order 1.e., 29.09.2071In.W.P.No.20093/20271and28.09.2021.InWP.No.20005/2702 1. 6.|Under these circumstances, | am of the considered opinion that tne inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to Tilethe returns/response/details on or before 17.09.2021 or even upto the date of the Impugned assessment order was on account ofthe tecnnical glitches attributable only to the respondents anddue to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and|sufficient cause and failure to appreciate this on the part of therespondents is in violation of principles of natural justice|warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. f.|in the result, | pass the following: 23453 (I)Tne petitions are hereby allowed. — (II)|The impugned assessment order dated 29.09.2021at Annexure-H5D and the demand notice aated29.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20093/270271are hereby quashed.at Annexure-H5D and the demand notice aated29.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20093/270271are hereby quashed. PKS (iil)The impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2021at Annexure-H5D ana the demand notice aated28 09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20005/27071are hereby quashed.at Annexure-H5D ana the demand notice aated28 09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20005/27071are hereby quashed. f.|in the result, | pass the following: 23453 (I)Tne petitions are hereby allowed. — (II)|The impugned assessment order dated 29.09.2021at Annexure-H5D and the demand notice aated29.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20093/270271are hereby quashed.at Annexure-H5D and the demand notice aated29.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20093/270271are hereby quashed. PKS (iil)The impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2021at Annexure-H5D ana the demand notice aated28 09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20005/27071are hereby quashed.at Annexure-H5D ana the demand notice aated28 09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20005/27071are hereby quashed. (iV) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 forreconsideration atresn atter providing sufficient and|reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file hisobpjections/returns/response etc and to proceed topass orders in accordance witn law. —reconsideration atresn atter providing sufficient and|reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file hisobpjections/returns/response etc and to proceed topass orders in accordance witn law. — SD/-JUDGE|