Wp/33123/2017 Of M/S. Deepak Extrusions Pvt. Ltd v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 18 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.RKRISHNA KUMAR;WRIT PETITION No.33123 OF 2017 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S. DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD.,A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER [HECOMPANIES ACT, 1956,HAVING ITS OFFICE AT:NO.180/780, YERANDHALLI VILLAGE,JIGAN!T HOBLI, ANEKAL ITALUKBEHIND BOMMASANDRA.INDUSTRIAL AREA,BANGALORE-560 058. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,MR. DEEPAK BETHALA,9/O. PRAKASH BETHALA,AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. (BY SRI A.LV.NAGARAJA RAO, ADVOCATE) PETITIONER AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4),C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE-560 001. (BY SRI E.LSANMATHI, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 2277OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THEIMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THERESPONDENT U/S.1438(3) READ WITH SECTION 144 AND14/7 OF |THE INCOME TAK ACI] DID.29.12.2016 FOR [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 I.E., ANNEX-R AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY [THERESPONDENT IN FORM NO.O/7 DID.29.12.2016 FOR [HEASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 I.E., ANNEXURE-S AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS”DAY, [HE COURT MADE THE FOLLOW ING:- ORDER in this petition, petittoner seeks quasning of the|impugned Assessment order at Annexure — R dated.29.12.2016 passed by respondent under Section 143 (3)|r/w 144 and 14/7 of the Income [ax Act, 1961 (for snort, ITAct) as well as consequential Demand Notice dated|29.12.2016 issued by the respondent for the Assessmentyear 2011-12 at Annexure — 8. 2.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and|learned counsel for the respondent and perused thematerial on record.. 3.A perusal of the material on record and_considering all the rival sudmissions will indicate tnatthougn several contentions nave been urged by botn sides”in support of their respective claims, despite the petitionersubmitting a detailed objection and documents as can beseen from replies / objections at Annexure — B dated| 15.04.2016, Annexure — D dated 16.08.2016, Annexure — Edated 03.10.2016, Annexure — G dated 21.10.2016,|Annexure — J dated 1/.11.2016 and Annexure — L dated28.11.2016 as well as Annexure — P and Q dated|21.12.2016 and 26.12.2016, respectively, respondent No.1.nas not properly or correctly considered or appreciated theSaid objections / replies and the documents submitted by the petitioner and nas proceeded to pass the Impugned.assessment order, which Is an unreasoned and non-speaking order without considering or appreciating theseveral contentions urged by the petitioner or documentsProducedbynimOrnearing|tnepetitionerand.consequently, tne iImpugnea order being violative ofprinciples of natural justice, the same deserves to be|quashed and the matter remitted back to the respondent forreconsideration afresh in accordance with law within a.stipulated time frame. 4in the result, | pass the following: ORDER Petition is herebyallowed The impugned Assessment order atAnnexure — R adateaq 29.12.701passed by respondent as well as|consequential Demand Notice dated29.12.2016 issued by the respondentat Annexure — S are hereby quasned. Matter.Isremitted.pack.tO|the.responaent for reconsideration atresnIn accordance with law within a periodof three montns from tne adate otreceipt of a copy of this order. IV. All rival contentions urged by theparties are kept open and no opinion Isexpressed on the same. Vo Lioerty Is reserved in favour of the.petitionertO|submitaqdaitionalopjections, replies, etc., along with tneadditional documents, if any, to therespondent, whicn snall be consideredprior to passing of the Impugned order ��� �������������������������������������������� ���� �����������������������������