M/S R .R Gold Palace Private Limited Vs the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6430 WP No. 3954 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3954 OF 2025 (T-IT)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/S R.R GOLD PALACE PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. DHEERAJ R. TAPSE SON OF SRI. R. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, NO.83/1, SOUNDARYA PARAMOUNT, 5TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003, PAN: AAFCR6929K. (UNDER REGISTERED COMPANY ACT 1956) …PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PREMAKUMARI BENGALURU-3, BMTC BUILDING, Location: HIGH COURT OF 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KARNATAKA KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095.

¶11

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. THIRUMALEESH M, ADVOCATE)

¶12

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 04.12.2023 HEREIN REFERRED TO AS

¶13

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6430 WP No. 3954 of 2025

¶14

ANNX-A FOR RELEASE OF SEIZED JEWELLERY AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT.

¶15

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

¶16

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

The petitioner/a Private Limited Company is before

¶20

this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a direction to the respondent to consider the application/representation dated 04.12.2023 (Annexure A) and to dispose of the same in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

¶21

Heard Sri S. Annamalai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. Thirumalesh, learned counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent. Perused the writ petition papers.

¶22

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6430 WP No. 3954 of 2025

¶23

Since the prayer of the petitioner is for a writ of mandamus, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a search took place under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (for short 'the Act' ), in the case of the petitioner on 08.02.2013. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated and orders were passed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 27.03.2015 (Annexure D1). It is submitted that Appellate Authority allowed the appeal of the petitioner with certain observations. Thereafter, the petitioner is said to have submitted representations on 04.12.2023 (Annexure-A) as well as on 22.03.2024 (Annexure-H) requesting the authorities to release the gold jewelleries seized during the search, in the light of the order passed by the Tribunal dated 20.09.2023.

¶25

4 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:6430 WP No. 3954 of 2025

¶27

It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said representations are not considered and no decision is taken on the said representations.

¶28

On the other hand, Sri V. Thirumalesh, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that appropriate decision would be taken within a reasonable time.

¶29

Against the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, the petitioner has preferred appeal in ITA No.162/Bang/2021 and the said appeal was allowed and consequential order is passed in terms of Annexure-G dated 20.12.2023. The petitioner submitted representations (Annexure-A and H) on 04.12.2023 as well as 22.03.2024 requesting the authorities to release the gold jewelleries seized during the search. But till this date, the respondents have not taken any decision or action on the said representations.

¶30

5 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:6430 WP No. 3954 of 2025

¶32

8. In that light of the above and as the respondents

¶33

have failed to perform their statutory duty, the petitioner would be entitled for a writ of mandamus as prayed.

¶34

In the above circumstances, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

a. Writ petition is allowed.

¶37

b. The respondent is directed to consider Annexure-A dated 04.12.2023 and Annexure-H dated 22.03.2024 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law,

¶38

within 60 days from today.

¶39

Sd/(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

¶40

NG

¶41

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67 CT: BHK

M/S R .R Gold Palace Private Limited v. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S R .R Gold Palace Private Limited v. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

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

Smt. T. Jayalakshmamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. K. Prabhu Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Yashoda S Arumugham Vs the High Court of Karnataka

M/S Muralikrishna Infracon (Bangalore) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Senior Intelligence Officer

M/S Concord Construction Vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax (AUDIT-2)

Akshay Kumar N Vs State Bank of India