Wp/8480/2023 Of Rajanna Mohan Kumar v. The Income-Tax Officer

Digitally signedby SUCHITRA MJLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA NC: 2023:KHC:23111WP No. 8480 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV -WRIT PETITION NO. 8480 OF 2023 (TIT) BETWEEN: RAJANNA MOHAN KUMAR, S/O. RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 17, SAMPIGEHALLI, SIDE 1 JAKKUR POST, BANGALORE - 560 064. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. PRATIBHA R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI - 110 001. 2. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(1), 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT DATED 18/03/2023 BY THE R-2 FOR AY 2016-17 IN FILE NO. ITBA/AST/S/148-1/2022-23/1050948111(1) ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. - 2 - THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') at Annexure-F and has also sought for setting aside of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act at Annexure-E. 2. The petitioner submits that though the order has been passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, which is followed by notice under Section 148 of the Act, the notice under Section 148A(b) has not been communicated to the petitioner at the e-mail address available with the Authorities as noticed in the orders. It is further submitted that in the light of the absence of notice, the reply to notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act could not be filed. It is submitted that in terms of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the annexure relates to the information refers to the TDS deducted by the purchaser and on the basis of such information, proceedings were sought to be initiated. Further, it is submitted that the sale transaction, which is the subject matter of information, has not flowed to the petitioner since the cheque issued in connection with the sale deed dated 14.12.2015 has not been honoured on presentation to the Banker of the purchaser. It is submitted that the cheque that was issued to the petitioner was cheque bearing No.884278 for Rs.15,00,000/- and the other vendors are also been issued with similar cheques and the said cheque has also been dishonoured as per the Bank Endorsement produced at Annexure-D. It is submitted that there was no receipt of amount and consequently, such information ought to have been clarified. However due to bonafide lapse, in the light of the non-intimation, no reply has been made out to the notice under Section 148A(b). 3. The case that is put forth by the petitioner makes out for an opportunity to be provided to the petitioner to make out the reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) keeping open all contentions. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter, the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act at Annexure-E is set aside and the matter is remitted to the stage post notice under Section 148A(b) at Annexure-C. The petitioner is at liberty to make out reply to the said notice raising all contentions available and the respondent-Department to consider the reply filed and proceed further in accordance with law. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Petitioner to appear before respondent No.2 and reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act at Annexure-C. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- JUDGE