Wp/2160/2021 Of M/S Shanthi Residency v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV -WRIT PETITION No.2160/2021 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/s. Shanthi Residency, No.957, 12[th] Main, HAL 2[nd] Stage, Indiranagar, Bangalore - 560 038, Represented by its Partner, K. Madhava, Aged 55 years, Son of Panjupoojari. … Petitioner (By Sri Balram R. Rao, Advocate) AND: 1. The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax I, BMTC Building, 80 Feet Road, 6[th] Block, Near KHB Games Village, Koramangala, Bengaluru - 560 095, Karnataka. 2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(2) (1), BMTC Building, 80 Feet Road, 6[th] Block, Near KHB Games Village, Koramangala, Bengaluru - 560 095, Karnataka. … Respondents (By Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order of the respondent dated 12.02.2020 passed under Section 264 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18 in DIN and letter vide Annexure-F and etc. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court, made the following: ORDER Petitioner has challenged the order at Annexure-F passed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act by the respondent - Authority. 2.The contention is that the petitioner in its application under Section 264 of the Act for revision of the assessment order has made out grounds found at paragraph Nos. 2.1 to 2.8 which were not taken note of while passing the impugned order. 3.Perusal of the order at Annexure-F would indicate that consideration that is found at paragraph Nos. 3.1 and 3.2 does not advert to the substantive grounds raised in Nos. 2.1 to 2.8. Only on that ground and as the impugned order is not a speaking order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to respondent No.1 for fresh consideration with a specific direction that the grounds raised in paragraph Nos. 2.1 to 2.8 of the application under Section 264 has to be specifically adverted to and an opportunity of hearing to be afforded before the matter is disposed off. 4.The assessee to appear before the authority on 08.03.2021 without any further notice. 5.It is submitted that consequent to the demand raised pursuant to the impugned order at Annexure-F, petitioner's account has been attached. Petitioner is permitted to operate his account stated to have been attached subject to the petitioner making a deposit of 20% of the demand for the assessment year 2013-14 and 2017- 18. Such deposit would be subject to the outcome of consideration as ordered above. Subject to above observations, petition is disposed off. VP Sd/- JUDGE