Disposed

M/S Gokul Hotels v. National Faceless Assessment Centre

Karnataka HC4 Feb 2026WP/27889/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Assessment under Section 147 r/w 144B for AY 2019-20 was challenged on the ground that notices after Section 148 were not served and no merits stand was taken. Court remitted matter to the stage of filing return in response to Section 148 notice, setting aside the assessment order, demand notice and computation sheet.

What did the court decide?

Assessment order, demand notice, computation order/sheet and consequential proceedings set aside; matter remitted to stage of filing return in response to Section 148 notice; petitioner to file return

M/S Gokul Hotels Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre — Income Tax | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:6388 WP No. 27889 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 27889 OF 2024 (T-IT)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

M/S GOKUL HOTELS O/AT NO.53, NAYANDAHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU-560 039 ALSO AT: ANANTAPUR ROAD, NEAR BYE PASS ROAD, BELLARY - 583 103 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI. D RAJESH S/O D VENKATESHALU AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT PARVATHI NAGAR, NEAR LAW COLLEGE, BELLARY - 583 103 PETITIONER IS A UNREGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM

¶11

… PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. MANOJ S N., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:6388 WP No. 27889 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

ROOM NO.401, 2^ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI - 110 003

¶18

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER ASSESSMENT UNIT, DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BELLARY, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, FORT, STAFF ROAD, BELLARY-583 102

¶19

… RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITBA/AST/5/147/2023-24/1062152624(1) DTD. 07.03.2024 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 R/W SECTION 144 AND 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 BY THE R-1 AND ALL CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS.QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 07.03.2024 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2023-24/1062152789(1) (ANNEXURE-B) PASSED BY THE R-1 AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner has called in question the correctness of

¶25

the assessment order at Annexure-A passed under Section

¶26

147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961

¶27

(for short 'the Act') for the assessment year 2019-20. Petitioner has also challenged the demand notice at

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:6388 WP No. 27889 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Annexure B; computation order/sheet at Annexure-C and further proceedings.

¶31

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner did not file return in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. It is the further case of the petitioner that he did not make out reply to the show cause notice as the same was not served. Though notice under Section 148 was served, the subsequent notices were not served.

¶32

It is the case of the petitioner that insofar as the variation is concerned, he has an explanation to offer and accordingly seeks that the matter be remanded with fresh opportunity.

¶33

In light of the case made out and noticing that the order is passed on the principle of best judgment assessment and has proceeded without any stand of the petitioner on merits, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the stage of filing of return in response to

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:6388 WP No. 27889 of 2024

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

notice under Section 148 of the Act. All contentions are kept open.

¶38

Accordingly, the assessment order at AnnexureA is set aside. The consequential demand notice at Annexure-B, computation order/sheet at Annexure-C and consequential proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A are also set aside. Petitioner to file return within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. All contentions are kept open.

¶39

6. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of .

¶40

SD/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶41

M/S Gokul Hotels v. National Faceless Assessment Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Gokul Hotels v. National Faceless Assessment Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Gs E-Commerce Private Limited Vs Superintendent of Central Tax.

M/S Edge Clothing Vs the Superintendent of Central Tax

M/S Adhi Easwer Trading Company Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

M/S Dnc Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner

M/S N M Kirshnamurthy Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

M/S Sai Srushti Infrastructure Vs Assessment Unit