Wp/9251/2022 Of One World Ventures v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

Digitallysigned byNARASIMHAMURTHYVANAMALALocation:HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD -WRIT PETITION NO. 9251 OF 2022 (TIT) BETWEEN: ONE WORLD VENTURES HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.809 KAMADHENU, 10 MAIN 5 CROSS, 4 BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.KUSH SHAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS … PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(3)(1), BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095 2. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI 2 FLOOR, E RAMP JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI-110 003 3. PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOMET TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI 2 FLOOR, E RAMP JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI-110 003 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONER’S CASE AND AFTER EXAMINING THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY THEREOF BE PLEASED TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT DATED 31.03.2021 (ANNEXURE-B) ISSUED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S 144B OF THE ACT DATED 29.03.2022 (ANNEXURE-P) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioner has impugned the notice dated 31.03.2021 [Annexure-B] issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act [for short, ‘IT Act’] and the Assessment Order dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-P] under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the IT Act. These impugned notice and order relate to the assessment year 2014-15. The petitioner’s principal grievance is as against the lack of reasonable opportunity. Sri Balram R Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri M Dilip, the learned standing counsel for the respondents, are heard for disposal of the petition in the light of this grievance. It would suffice for this Court for the purposes of the present petition to record that with the issuance of intimation of the proposed reassessment, the petitioner has asked for reasons, and with such reasons being given, the petitioner has filed the statement of objections. The second respondent, by the order dated 23.03.2022, has disposed of the objections and this is followed by the notice dated 24.03.2022 under Section 148 of the IT Act. The petitioner is given time until 23:59 hours of 26.03.2022 to file response and the assessment order is issued on the ground that there is no response. It is also recorded in the assessment order that the petitioner was allowed thirty [30] days from the date of service of notice to file the statement of objections, and indisputably this is factually incorrect. This circumstance demonstrates lack of due opportunity and therefore there must be interference to the limited extent of quashing the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-P] and restoring the proceedings. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed in part, and the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-P] is quashed. The petitioner is reserved liberty to file statement of objections within a period of four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is also recorded in the assessment order that the petitioner was allowed thirty [30] days from the date of service of notice to file the statement of objections, and indisputably this is factually incorrect. This circumstance demonstrates lack of due opportunity and therefore there must be interference to the limited extent of quashing the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-P] and restoring the proceedings. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed in part, and the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 [Annexure-P] is quashed. The petitioner is reserved liberty to file statement of objections within a period of four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. [b] It is needless to observe that if there is any delay in enabling the petitioner to file such objections on e-portal, there shall be corresponding extension of time. Further, it must be observed that as interference is on the limited ground, the petitioner will not be able to raise the ground of limitation. Sd/- JUDGE AN/-