This order disposed of a writ petition challenging tax demand notices before the petitioner paid the full balance. The court granted liberty to pay the balance in terms of the notified One Time Settlement Scheme.
Liberty to pay further amounts in terms of the notified One Time Settlement Scheme.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:44432 WP No. 4745 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4745 OF 2024 (LB-TAX)
BETWEEN:
V SOMA SHEKAR S/O MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 9/37, 2ND MAIN, 4TH CROSS KEB ROAD, ILLAMADU B S K 3RD STAGE BANGALORE SOUTH HOSAKERE HALLI BANGALORE KARNATAKA - 560085.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. NANDINI B.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HARIPRASAD M B.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:44432 WP No. 4745 of 2024
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAHUL CARIAPPA., AGA FOR R1;
SMT. SUMANA BALIGA M, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICES, ALL DATED 06/12/2023, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT VIDE BEARING NO. (1) ARO (RRN) /W-160/PR-696/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 (2) ARO (RRN) /W-160/PR-697/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 (3) ARO (RRN) /W-160/PR698/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 (4) ARO (RRN) /W160/PR-699/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2019-20 (5) ARO (RRN) /W-160/PR-700/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 AND (6) ARO (RRN) /W-160/PR-701/2020-21 FOR THE YEAR 2021-22 ANNEXURE D TO J.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the petitioner has availed the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme notified and certain amounts have been paid, and in fact, the learned counsel submits that this Court may dispose of the petition granting three [3] weeks time to pay balance amount in terms of this Scheme.
This submission echoes the statement made on
behalf of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike as recorded by this Court on 14.10.2024. Hence, the petition stands disposed of observing that the petitioner shall be at liberty, subject to all just exceptions in law, to pay further amounts in terms of the notified OTS Scheme.
SD/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
SA ct:sr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition challenging impugned demand notices can be dismissed on liberty to pay balance amounts under the One Time Settlement Scheme.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V Soma Shekar
The State of Karnataka Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Represented By Its Commissioner
The Joint Commissioner Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
The Assistant Revenue Officer, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
