Wp/4963/2020 Of Sri Kunal Kiran Parikh v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATEKD THIS THE DAY OF MARCH, 2020 BEFORE| THR HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV .WRIT PETITION No.4963/2020 (TIT) BETWEEN: SRI KUNAL KIRAN PARIKH»/O SRI KIRAN ISHWARAL PARIKH,AGED ABOUT 40 YBARS|NO.214, I[Si]FLOOR, ~DEFENCE COLONY, 3 MAIN," CROdS»s, INDIRA NAGAR,BENGALURU-560038..... PETITIONE(BY SMT. VANI H., ADVOCATE) AND:THE INCOME TAX OFFICKBRWARD 93(3)(3),BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,$ BLOCK, KORMANGALA, |BBENGALURU-560095._. RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) KRERKRERE THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND|22/ OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THEASSHKHSSMENIT ORDER DATED 31.12.2019 PASSED BY TRESPONDENT UNDER SECILION 44 R.W.S 14/7 OF THE INCOMTAX ACT, 1961 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.| THIS WRIT PRTITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY|HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Petitioner is seeking for issuance of writ in thenature of the certiorari to quash the assessment orderdated 31.12.2019 passed by the respondent underSection 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax!Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and has also sought forissuance of writ of certiorari to quash the demandnotice dated 31.12.2019. Petitioner has further soughtfor issuance ot writ of mandamus to direct the!respondent to afford a reasonable opportunity to thepetitioner and pass fresh assessment order for the year2019-13. a2The petitioner contends that the assessment|that has been concluded is without affording an.opportunity to the petitioner and that the contents ofthe assessment order relates to the petitioner having afixed deposit for an amount of Rs.57,00,/750/- which thepetitioner denies. It is further submitted that if the petitioner was notified prior to conclusion of theassessment proceedings, petitioner would have placedon record his say as regards to the demand raised onthe basis of material taken note of by the AssessingAuthority. 3.Upon notice, learned counsel appearing forthe department submits that the question of issuance ofnotice may not arise in light of the proviso to Section144 of the Act. 4.However, without entering into the merits ofthe contention, in light of the stand taken by thepetitioner that the only addition that is made is on thebasis of fixed deposit for Rs.57,00,/50/- and the otheraddition relating to credit card bills is something thatcan be explained if an opportunity is given, the notice ofdemand at Annexure-F is set aside. The assessment|order at Annexure-E is also set aside while making itclear that the contents of assessment order itself is to! be treated as show cause notice as contemplated undersection 144 of the Act pursuant to the IT returns atAnnexure-D. | 5.The petitioner to submit his reply to theshow cause notice as observed above and appear beforethe Assessing authority without waiting for any freshnotice on 20.03.2020. It is also made clear that the'petitioner to be present on such further dates as may berequired by the Assessing Officer and co-operate withthe proceedings before the Assessing Officer. Suchproceedings to be completed within a period of eightweeks from the date of appearance of the petitioner. In light of the above, petition isdisposed off VPI Sd/-| JUDGE