Wp/30503/2019 Of Smt. Vinita v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3 DAY OF MARCH 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV -WRIT PETITION No.30503/2019 (TIT) BETWEEN: Smt.Vinita Aged 47 years No.1334, 32[nd] 'E' Cross 16[th] Main, 4[th] T Block Jayanagar, Bangalore - 560 041. … Petitioner (By Sri Sudheendra B.R., Advocate) AND: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-3 Room No.517, 5[th] Floor BMTC Building, 80 Ft. Road Koramangala 6[th] Block Bengaluru - 560 095. … Respondent (By Sri K.V.Aravind, Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order passed by the respondent under Section 264 dated 13.03.2019 enclosed in Annexure-A and direct the respondent to consider the petition filed under Section 264 enclosed as Annexure-E and allow exemption under Section 54EC in computing the total income of the minor to be clubbed in the hands of the petitioner and etc. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing 'B' group this day, the Court made the following: ORDER The petitioner has called in question the order dated 13.03.2019 passed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['I.T.Act' for brevity] enclosed at Annexure-A and a further direction is sought for consideration of her petition filed under Section 264 of I.T. Act at Annexure-E and allow the exemption under Section 54EC in computing the total income of the minor to be clubbed in the hands of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner submits that the order at Annexure-A is proceeded on the premise that the Revision petition under Section 264 of I.T. Act has been filed against the intimation under Section 143(1) of the I.T. Act 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that her application for rectification came to be rejected as per the order at Annexure-F dated 25.04.2017 and as against such rejection of her rectification application, she has preferred a Revision Petition at Annexure-E stated to have been filed on 05.04.2018. It is submitted that the Revision Petition at Annexure-E has not been considered on merits and the impugned order has been passed. 4. Taking note that the petitioner had filed Revision Petition at Annexure-E raising various contentions as against the order dated 25.04.2017 at Annexure-F, the Authority ought to have considered the Revision Petition filed as against rejection of her rectification application instead of wrongly construing it to be a Revision Petition filed against the intimation under Section 143(1) of the I.T.Act. 5. Solely on this narrow ground, the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 13.03.2019 is set aside. The respondent to consider the Revision Petition at Annexure-E as the one filed against the order of rejection of her rectification application at Annexure-F dated 25.04.2017 and pass orders in accordance with law. All contentions of parties are kept open. Subject to the above observations, this petition is disposed off. Sd/- JUDGE VGR