The Karnataka High Court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner challenged a Notice for tax payment discrepancy. The court refused intervention as the notice was preliminary and required further opportunity.
Petitioner directed to appear before authorities without further notice on 02.03.2022.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.4050/2022 (T-MVT)
BETWEEN :
Santosh K., S/o. Krishnappa Aged about 43 years #1928, 2nd Cross, 1st Main MRCR Layout, Prashanthnagar Bangalore-560 079.
… Petitioner
(By Sri Shanti Bhushan H., Advocate)
AND :
… Respondents
(By Sri Hemakumar, AGA)
2
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned Notice dated 10.01.2022 vide Annexure-B issued by the respondent No.2 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash the impugned Notice dated 10.01.2022 at Annexure-B passed by respondent No.2.
3
submits that there is an enquiry regarding certain discrepancies relating to payment of tax during the relevant period of time. However, it is submitted that order would be passed pursuant to the notice after affording opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his case and the apprehension of the petitioner regarding precipitative steps is unfounded as any steps would be taken only after order passed pursuant to the notice at Annexure-B.
Additional Government Advocate and also noticing that Annexure-B is only a notice and that proceedings would be proceeded with after giving an opportunity to the petitioner, it would not be appropriate to intervene at this stage while making it clear that contentions of the petitioner are kept open.
without further notice on 02.03.2022.
4
is disposed off .
Sd/JUDGE
PN/VS
Santosh K.
State of Karnataka
S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court