Kiran Shagle Chikkappa Vs Income Tax Officer

KIRAN SHAGLE CHIKKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O SHAGLE CHIKKAPPA, NO.151B, SOBHA MALADHETE, JAKKUR PLANTATION, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE – 560 064. PAN: AJXPC0056A

¶10

PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT, NO.16338, SANTA CRISTOBAL STREET, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, USA - 92127. (PRESENTLY IN INDIA)

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S. V., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by NANDINI D Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1)(1), BANGALORE – 560 095.

¶16

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO. 401, 2^ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI – 110 003.

¶17

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BANGALORE – 560 095.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE)

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B OF THE ACT DATED 28.03.2024 BEARING ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023-24/1063512107(1) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2022-23 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶26

“i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed U/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 28/03/2024 bearing ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023-24/1063512107(1) passed by the Respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure - A.

¶27

ii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty order u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act dated 05/09/2024 bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/272A(1)(d)/2024-25/1068385759(1) by the Respondent No.2 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure A1.

¶28

iil) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty order under

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶31

section 270A of the Act, dated 17/09/2024 bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2024-25/1068807845(1) by the Respondent No. 2 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure - A2.

¶32

iv) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty order u/s 271AAC(1)of the Act dated 19/09/2024 bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/202425/1068841505(1), by the Respondent No. 2 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure - АЗ.

¶33

v) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the rectification order u/s 154 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act dated 22/01/2025 bearing DIN No. ITBA/REC/S/154_1/202425/1072419093(1), by the Respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure - A4.

¶34

vi) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated 11/02/2025 bearing DIN No. ITBA/COM/F/17/202425/1073117701(1), by the Respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2022-23 herein marked as Annexure A5.

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶36

vii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.

¶37

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶38

counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶39

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent having issued Show Cause Notice dated 17.03.2024, petitioner did not submit any reply to the same and as such, respondent No.2 proceeded to pass the impugned exparte assessment order at Annexure-A dated 28.03.2024 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), pursuant to which, respondent No.2 issued the penalty order dated 05.09.2024 under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act at Annexure-A1, penalty order dated 17.09.2024 under Section 270A at Annexure-A2, penalty order dated 19.09.2024 under Section 271AAC(1) of the Act at Annexure-A3 and respondent No.1 issued rectification order dated 22.01.2025 under Section 154 read with Section 143(3) of the Act at Annexure-A4 and demand notice dated 11.02.2025 at Annexure-

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶42

A5 and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶43

In this context, it is pointed out that inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit replies to the notices issued by the respondents and to participate in the proceedings due to bonafide and unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and consequently, the petitioner was not in a position to issue reply or appear before the respondents and participate in the said proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioner has a good case to urge on merits and if one more opportunity is granted in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner would submit its reply along with the documents and participate in the proceedings and as such, it is necessary that the impugned order at Annexure –A be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the respondents by providing one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit its reply to the notices and direct the respondents to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶44

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that despite sufficient opportunity being granted in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner did not send its reply nor participated

¶45

6 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶47

in the proceedings and consequently, the impugned order does not warrant interference by this Court and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶48

A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure – A will clearly indicate that the same was passed in the absence of the petitioner, who did not avail the opportunity provided by the respondent, who has proceeded to pass the impugned order. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and specific assertions on the part of the petitioner that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to send reply enclosing documents and contest the proceedings and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner, by adopting a justice oriented approach, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law after providing one more opportunity to the petitioner in this regard.

¶49

In the result, I pass the following:

¶50

7 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:13793 WP No. 9644 of 2025

¶52

ORDER

¶53

(i) The impugned assessment order at Annexure-A dated 28.03.2024, penalty order dated 05.09.2024 at Annexure-A1, penalty order dated 17.09.2024 at Annexure-A2, penalty order dated 19.09.2024 at Annexure-A3, rectification order dated 22.01.2025 at Annexure-A4 and demand notice dated 11.02.2025 at Annexure-A5, are hereby set aside.

¶54

(ii) Matter is remitted back for reconsideration afresh to the stage of petitioner submitting reply to Show Cause Notice dated 17.03.2024 and to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶55

(iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file its reply, pleadings, documents, etc., before respondent No.1, who shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶56

(iv) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶57

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

¶59

MDS

Kiran Shagle Chikkappa v. Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Shagle Chikkappa v. Income Tax Officer

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

Sri Kuvempu B. C. M., Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Prathap. v Vs State of Karnataka

Kum Meghana Vs the Principal Secretary

M/S Ace Creative Learning Private Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1)(1)

Sri Shanthanaraj R Vs the State of Karnataka

Yashaswini Buildlers Private Ltd. Vs the Income Tax Officer