Wp/6844/2024 Of M/S Gangadhareshwara Enterprises Sbg Bar v. The Income Tax Officer

Digitally signed byLEELAVATHI S RLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23 DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR -WRIT PETITION NO. 6844 OF 2024 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S GANGADHARESHWARA ENTERPRISES SBG BAR B M ROAD, SAKALESHAPURA 573134, REP BY ITS PARTNER, SRI SACHIN H NARAYAN, S/O H G NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANI H.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 AND TPS, WARD 1 AND TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 2 STAGE, BELUR ROAD, HASSAN 573201. 2 STAGE, BELUR ROAD, HASSAN 573201. 2.ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. DILIP.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22 1104716032(1) DATE 27/03/2022 PASSED BY THE R2 UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 144B OF THE ACT VIDE ANNEXURE-E, AND THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING DIN AND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2021- 22/1041716051(1) DATED 27.3.22 ISSUED BY THE R2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “Wherefore it is prayed that this Honourable Court be pleased to; (a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or a direction to quash and set aside the impugned order bearing DIN ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1041716032(1) dated 27..03.2022 passed by the second respondent under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act vide ANNEXURE-E, and the demand notice bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/10417160051(1) dated 27.03.2022 issued by the second respondent vide ANNEXURE-E-1. (b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or a direction to quash and set side the impugned order bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/271F/2022-23/1045249237(1) dated 06.09.2022 passed by the first respondent under section 271F of the Act along with the demand notice vide ANNEXURE-F. (c) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or a direction to quash and set aside the impugned order bearing DIN No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(b) of the Act along with the demand notice vide ANNEXURE-F-1 (d) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or a direction to quash and set aside the impugned order bearing DIN No.ITBA/PNL/F/271(1)(c) 2022=23/1045610046(1) dated 16.09.22 passed by the first respondent under section 271(1)(c) of the Act along with the demand notice vide ANNEXURE-F-2. (e) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to afford reasonable opportunity to petitioner to furnish reply to notice under Section 148 and to pass orders in accordance with law after judiciously considering all the replies and documents to be furnished by Petitioner. (f) Issue such other order and further reliefs as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court.” 2. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners did not receive the show cause notices dated 05.03.2022 and 25.03.2022 issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 148 of the IT Act, as a result of which the petitioner could not submit its reply and contest the proceedings which culminated in the impugned order and consequential notices which deserve to be set aside and the matter remitted back to the respondent for NC: 2024:KHC:16649 reconsideration afresh by providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and giving him an opportunity of personal hearing in the matter. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would 2. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners did not receive the show cause notices dated 05.03.2022 and 25.03.2022 issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 148 of the IT Act, as a result of which the petitioner could not submit its reply and contest the proceedings which culminated in the impugned order and consequential notices which deserve to be set aside and the matter remitted back to the respondent for NC: 2024:KHC:16649 reconsideration afresh by providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and giving him an opportunity of personal hearing in the matter. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed. 4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit its reply to the notices under Section 148 of the IT Act and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause. Under these circumstances, adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to file its reply along with the documents and contest the show cause notice and proceedings pursuant thereto, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure – F, consequential notices at Annexures – F1 & F2, consequently remit the matter back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of submission of reply to the show cause notices dated 05.03.2022 and 25.03.2022 under Section 148 of the IT Act, and proceed further in accordance with law. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexures – F and notices at F1 and F2, are hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh from the stage of the petitioner filing objections to show cause notices dated 05.03.2022 and 25.03.2022 issued under Section 148 of the IT Act. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file pleadings, objections, documents etc., which shall be considered by the respondent No.1 who shall provide an opportunity to the petitioner and hear him personally and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20