Wp/20604/2021 Of Shri S S Shivakumar v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

1 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.20604/2021(TIT) BETWEEN SHRI S.S.SHIVAKUMAR,9/0 S.N.SRINIVASAMURTRY,AGED 49 YEARS,R/AT No.235, 7 D MAIN,|3 BLOCK, 4 STAGE,BASAVESWARA NAGAR,BANGALORE - 560 079. | ... PETITIONE (BY SRI. M.V.SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR)ORI. ARAVIND.V.CHAVAN, ADV.) AND' 1_|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), C.R.BUILDING,, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 O07. 2 _PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING,, QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE - 560 O01.BANGALORE - 560 O01. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. E.LSANMATHI ALONG WITRSRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV., FOR R-1 AND R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 2277OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE| ASSESSEMIN ORDER DATED 29.09.2021 PASSED BY R-1 VIDE|ANNEXURE-D1 AND DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 OF|THE JI ACI DATED 29.09.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-DZ FOR)ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-7271 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING.THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING! ORDER 1]In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following| reliefs: ‘a. Issue a Writ of certiorari to quasn the assessment order|dated 29.09.2021 passed by Tirst respondent bearing|NO.ITBA/AS T/M/193C/2021-22/1036005390(1)dated 29.09.2021 passed by Tirst respondent bearing|NO.ITBA/AS T/M/193C/2021-22/1036005390(1) Annexure-D1 and Demand notice u/s.156 of the IT Actcated29.09.7071bearing|No.DIN:IF ET BA/AS T/M/193C/2021-22/1036005394Annexure-D2 for A.Y .2020-271cated29.09.7071bearing|No.DIN:IF ET BA/AS T/M/193C/2021-22/1036005394Annexure-D2 for A.Y .2020-271 b. Issue a writ declaring that proceedings Initiated u/s.|153A r/w s.143 of the IT Act it is mandatory to issue.notice "of hearing” as per Explanation to Section 153A|of the II Act as hela by the Apex court In ACIT Vs.|Hote! Blue Moon (2010)321 TTR 362(SC).”153A r/w s.143 of the IT Act it is mandatory to issue.notice "of hearing” as per Explanation to Section 153A|of the II Act as hela by the Apex court In ACIT Vs.|Hote! Blue Moon (2010)321 TTR 362(SC).” DD Heard Sri M.V.Seshachala, learned Senior Counsel for |ori Aravind Chnavan, learned counsel! for the petitioner and srE.l.Sanmathi, learned counsel along with Sri K.V.Aravind,|learned counsel for respondents. — 3.Tnougn several contentions Nave been urged by the.petitioner in support of his contention, the material on record, inparticular, the notice dated 09.09.2021 Issued at Annexure-B1.will indicate that the petitioner was called upon to furnishinformation, details, etc., on or before 14.09.2021. it is tne)grievance of the petitioner that despite he being ready and willing|to furnisn the information electronically in E-proceeding throughnis account in e-tiling website of the Department, ne was not Inaposition to do so on account of several technical glitches in thewebsite as evident from Annexures-C1 to C6, all of which)establisn that many persons Including the petitioner were not Inaposition to furnish the aetails/information as sought for tromthem. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned assessment)order passed on 29.09.2021, by wnicn date technical glitchesnad not been rectified and without providing any opportunity tothe 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 before14.09.2021 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. 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 before14.09.2021 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-C1 to C6 will indicate that though the|petitioner was called upon to file returns/objections/response on)or before 14.09.2021, the petitioner could not do so on account ofseveral technical glitches in the website/portal of the respondents|which prevented tne petitioner and acted as an Impediment andobstacie for the petitioner to respond the notice dated 09.09.2021within the stipulated period as Indicated In the notice or even up|to 29.09.2021, the date of Impugned assessment order. 6.|Under these circumstances, | am of the considered opinion that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to file| the returns/response/details on or before 14.09.2021 or even upto 29.09.2019 was on account of the technical glitchesattributable only to the respondents and due to bonafide reasons,|unavoidable circumstances and sufticient cause and failure to.appreciate this on the part of the respondents Is in violation ofprinciples of natural justice warranting interference by this Court)in the present petition. f.|in the result, | pass the following: $%&'% (I)Tne petition is nereby allowed. | (II)|The impugned assessment order dated 29.09.2021at Annexure-D1 and the demand notice aated|29.09.2021 at Annexure-D2 are hereby quashed. |at Annexure-D1 and the demand notice aated|29.09.2021 at Annexure-D2 are hereby quashed. | (III)Tne matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for|reconsideration afresh after providing sufficient andreasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file hisobpjections/returns/response etc and to proceed topass orders In accordance with law.reconsideration afresh after providing sufficient andreasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file hisobpjections/returns/response etc and to proceed topass orders In accordance with law. SD/-JUDGE|