Nelannne Maheshwarappa Mohan Vs Chief Commissioner

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148A(b) OF THE ACT DATED 24.01.2023 BEARING DIN AND LETTER NO.ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/202223/1049069246(1) ISSUED BY THE R2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A., AND ETC.

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:50107 WP No. 24625 of 2023

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶27

i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order and quash AnnexureL order dated 18.04.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 bearing Order No.02/2023-24;

¶28

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order and direct the Respondent No.2 to release the goods of the Petitioner seized by way of Annexure-L order dated 18.04.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 bearing Order No.02/202324;

¶29

iii) To grant such other and incidental reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity.

¶30

iv) To allow this writ petition with costs to the petitioner.

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:50107 WP No. 24625 of 2023

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 24.01.2023, the respondent issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'IT Act') to which, the petitioner submitted a replies dated 06.03.2023 and 07.03.2023. Thereafter, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 24.03.2023 under Section 148A(d) of the IT Act, followed by a notice under Section 148 dated 24.04.2023, aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain documents in support of his claim/defence were not available with the petitioner when he submitted his reply to Section 148A(b) notice under the IT Act and as a result of which, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order. It is submitted that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to produce documents during the course of the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:50107 WP No. 24625 of 2023

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

sufficient cause and as such, if the impugned order and impugned notice are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law, the petitioner would submit additional documents in support of his claim and the respondent may be directed to proceed further and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

¶38

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the petitioner, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexures-'C' and 'D' and remit the matter back to the second respondent for reconsideration afresh, to the stage of Section 148A(b) notice dated 21.04.2023 and to proceed further, in accordance with law.

¶39

5s. In the result, I pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i) Writ Petition is allowed.

¶42

5 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:50107 WP No. 24625 of 2023

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

(ii) The impugned order/notice at

¶46

Annexures – 'C' and 'D' issued by

¶47

second respondent are hereby set aside.

¶48

(iii) Matter is remitted back to the second respondent for reconsideration afresh to the stage of Section 148A(b) notice dated 24.01.2023 and to proceed further, in accordance with law.

¶49

(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit additional replies, pleadings, documents, etc., which shall be considered by the second respondent, which shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further, in accordance with law.

¶50

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶51

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 33

¶52

DH

Nelannne Maheshwarappa Mohan v. Chief Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nelannne Maheshwarappa Mohan v. Chief Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. Vs Union of India

M/S Wipro Ge Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Shri. Ameerul Sheeraz, Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

M R Jewels Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Royal College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education (Ncte Src)

Smt M Manjula Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax