Wp/39372/2014 Of Mrs. Chandra Devi Kothari v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALOREDATHKD THIS THE 1[‘T]DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014. BEFORE| THR HON BLE MR. JUSTICBK HULUVADI G. RAMESH mWRIT PETITION NO.39372 OF 2014 (TIT) BETWEEN: MRS.CHANDRA DEVI KOTHARIW/O.DEVICHAND KOTHARI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARSRESIDING AT NO.1OMKAR VIHAR.SHARDHANAND BHAWAN ROAD.V.V.PURAMBANGALORE — 560 OO4. _.. PRHTITIONER (BY SRI.VINAY.V, ADV..,) AND: INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 9(3), 3 KLOORJEEVAN SAMPIGE, LIC BUILDINGSAMPIGEROAD, MALLESHWARAM|BANGALORE — 560 003. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV..,) THIS WRIT PETITION [IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226AND 227 OF THER CONSTITUIION OF INDIA PRAYING TOQUASH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BYTHE RESPONDENT U/S.143(3) R.W.SECTION 147 OF THE|INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 30-00-2014 FOR THE|ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 I.E., ANNEXE XURE-D ANDCONSEQUENTIAL NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE) RESPONDENT, DATED 30-06-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENTYEAR 2009-10 I.E., ANNE XURE-E. THIS WRIT PRTITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY.HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel is directed totake notice for the respondent. The petitioner has sought to quash the impugnedassessment order passed by the respondent undersection 143 (3) read with Section 147 of the Income TaxAct, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act) for theAssessmentYearY2AOOQYSaltAnnexure-lLandconsequentialnoticeoT demandissuedbytherespondent1n Form -/dated30.6.2014fortheAssessment Year 2009-10 at Annexure-E and tor such|other relief. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits ©that he has filed return of income for the Assessment|Year 2009-10 on 22.95.2007 declaring an income ofRs.1,67,430/- and the said return was accepted undersection 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the respondent issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act ons30.6.2014.for.re-opening oT|theassessmentby requesting the petitioner to file return of income for thesaid year. In response to the said notice, the petitionerrequested the respondent to treat the earlier return filedas return filed in response to the notice issued undersection 148 of the Act. Subsequently, the respondentcommenced the proceeding by issuance of questionnaireunder Section 142(1) of the Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitsthat the respondent has failed to assign reason for re-opening the assessment which is a condition precedentfor such re-opening and also the respondent has notintimated the same to the petitioner even though thepetitionerhas|participated1n the.re-assessment.proceedings. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for therespective parties. o. The grievance of the petitioner is that alreadyincome tax return is filed for the Assessment Year 2009- 10 which is well within time and the same has been.accepted by the respondent-Authority and withoutassigning any reason, the notice has been issued on.30.6.2014 for re-opening the assessment. According tothe counsel, such a reason is necessary for re-openingthe assessment. 6. Thelearnedcounsel appearing{fOrtherespondent-Authority submitted that once the petitionerhas filed the income tax return for the Assessment Year|2009-10 and now he is seeking for reason for re-filingthe same. It is further submitted that only when doingre-filing, reasons could be assigned, but not earlier. Asper Annexure-D there is an assessment order passed,since the petitioner did not file another return as soughtfor by the respondent-Authority under Section 148 ofthe Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for therespondent-Authority that the reassessment made bythe Revenue could be challenged before the AppellateAuthority. Hence, it is too premature for the petitionerto approach this Court. 6. Thelearnedcounsel appearing{fOrtherespondent-Authority submitted that once the petitionerhas filed the income tax return for the Assessment Year|2009-10 and now he is seeking for reason for re-filingthe same. It is further submitted that only when doingre-filing, reasons could be assigned, but not earlier. Asper Annexure-D there is an assessment order passed,since the petitioner did not file another return as soughtfor by the respondent-Authority under Section 148 ofthe Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for therespondent-Authority that the reassessment made bythe Revenue could be challenged before the AppellateAuthority. Hence, it is too premature for the petitionerto approach this Court. 7. The reasons to be assigned for the purpose ofre-filing which is sought by the petitioner herein, couldbe considered after filing of the return once again as perthe notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.|Therefore, it is for the petitioner to approach theAppellate Authority within two months as per theproviso under Sec.146(a) of the Act. With the above direction, the petition is disposed ot. sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel to file memo ofappearance within four weeks. Sd/- JUDGE PB