Wp/22636/2023 Of Smt Gayathri Bai Mannaji Rao v. Income Tax Officer

Digitally signed byVANDANA SLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR -WRIT PETITION NO. 22636 OF 2023 (TIT) BETWEEN: SMT GAYATHRI BAI MANNAJI RAO W/O LATE VIDHUR KUMAR, AGED 69 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 207/A BALAJI ROAD, TYAGARAJANAGAR, II BLOCK, BENGALURU – 560 028. PAN. NO. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO. 35(2)(5) BANGALROE BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095. 2.ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI II FLOOR, E-RAMP JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI - 110 003.DELHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI II FLOOR, E-RAMP JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI - 110 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. DILIP.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONERS CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF THE PLEASED TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER SECTION 144 OF ACT DATED 26/09/2019 IN ORDER NO. ITBA/ AST/S/144/2019-20/1018344742(1) (ANNEXURE-C) OF THE ACT AS WELL AS IMPUGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 26/09/2019 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE ACT IN NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1018344790(1) (ANNEXURE-D) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017/18 PASSED BY THE R1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “ (1) Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction under Article 226 of the constitution of India; calling for the records of the petitioners case and after examining the legality and validity thereof be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order under Section 144 of Act dated 26.09.2019 in order no. ITBA/ AST/S/144/2019-20/1018344742(1) (Annexure-C) of the Act as well as impugned notice of demand dated 26.09.2019-20/1018344790(1) (Annexure-D) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 1[st] Respondent. (2) Writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India ordering and directing the respondents by themselves by their subordinates, servants or agents to withdraw and cancel the impugned order under Section 144 of Act dated 26.09.2019 in order no. ITBA/ AST/S/144/2019-20/1018344742(1) (Annexure-C) of the Act as well as impugned notice of demand dated 26.09.2019- 20/1018344790(1) (Annexure-D) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 1[st] Respondent, and (3) A writ of Prohibitio or a writ in the nature of prohibitio or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India prohibiting and restraining the respondents by themselves their sub ordinates, servants and agents from taking any action in furtherance or consequent to impugned order under Section 144 of Act dated 26.09.2019 in order no. ITBA/ AST/S/144/2019-20/1018344742(1) (Annexure-C) of the Act as well as impugned notice of demand dated 26.09.2019-20/1018344790(1) (Annexure-D) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 1[st] Respondent; 20/1018344790(1) (Annexure-D) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 1[st] Respondent, and (3) A writ of Prohibitio or a writ in the nature of prohibitio or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India prohibiting and restraining the respondents by themselves their sub ordinates, servants and agents from taking any action in furtherance or consequent to impugned order under Section 144 of Act dated 26.09.2019 in order no. ITBA/ AST/S/144/2019-20/1018344742(1) (Annexure-C) of the Act as well as impugned notice of demand dated 26.09.2019-20/1018344790(1) (Annexure-D) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 1[st] Respondent; (4) Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction under Article 226 of the constitution of India; calling for the records of the petitioners case and after examining the legality and validity thereof be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order under Section 270A of Act dated 04.03.2022 in DIN no. ITBA/ PNL/F/S/156/2021-22/1040342127(1) (Annexure-E) of the Act as, impugned notice of demand dated 03.03.2022 issued under Section 156 of the act in DIN and Notice No. ITBA/ PNL/F/S/156/2021-22/1040342127(1) (Annexure-F),the impugned order under Section 271AAC(1) of Act dated 04.03.2022 in DIN no. ITBA/ PNL/ F/271AAC(1) / 2021-22/ 1040339976(1) (Annexure-G) of the Act as well as impugned notice of demand dated 03.03.2022 issued under section 156 of the act in DIN and Notice No. ITBA/PNL/S/156/2021-22/1040339956(1)(Annexure –G1) for the Assessment Year 2017-18 passed by the 2[nd] Respondent; (5) Grant the interim relief in terms of prayer (3) above, and (6) Issue any such other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and direct the respondents on this writ petition.” 2. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned assessment order at Annexure – C dated 26.09.2019 in order to contend that due to the ill-health of her husband, petitioner was not only in a position to submit response/reply to the notices issued by the respondents which have culminated in the impugned order which has been passed without proving sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner thereby violating the principles of natural justice. It is submitted that the impugned order is also contrary to the relevant statutory provisions and the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Bhavana Steel Vs Income Tax Officer [2023] 454 ITR 670. It is therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by the respondent deserves to be set aside and the matter remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submit that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted that the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Bhavana Steel’s case supra, is not applicable to the facts of the instance case. 4. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the same is an exparte order which has been passed without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Under these circumstances, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that due to her husband’s ill-health on account of bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, it was not possible for the petitioner to submit reply/response along with the documents to the notices issued by the respondent, by adopting justice oriented approach, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order is hereby set aside. (iii) Matter remitted back to the respondents for 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order is hereby set aside. (iii) Matter remitted back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit pleadings, documents, judgments etc., which would be considered by the respondent who shall proceed further, in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4