SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2044

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.
Mrs K.B. Bhojamma - Petitioner
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle - 2(4) – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 36863 of 2025 (T-IT)
Decided On : 09-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. A. Shankar, Senior Advocate For Sri. U.A. Madhusudhan, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri. M. Dilip, Advocate

The jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue notices under the Income Tax Act is annulled if the action violates procedural norms established by recent legislative changes.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 147, 148, 151A, and 156 - Quashing assessment and demand notices - Writ petition allowed based on precedent ruling that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue notice post-Faceless Scheme implementation. (Paras 5 and 14)

(B) Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that actions not within the authority of the assessing officer are void, citing the principle established in jurisprudence regarding procedural inconsistencies. (Paras 8 and 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged multiple notices issued by the Respondent related to the assessment year 2021-22, specifically an assessment order and demand notices. The petitioner argued that these notices were issued without jurisdiction following the implementation of the Faceless Scheme.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the impugned notices were issued after the new regulations came into force, rendering them invalid and quashed the notices and all subsequent orders.

Issues: The issue addressed was the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to initiate proceedings post-Faceless Scheme implementation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the jurisdictional error in issuing the notices invalidates the entire process, aligning with established judicial principles regarding procedural validity.

Result: The petition is allowed; the notices and consequential orders are quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks quashing of assessment orders. (Para 2)
2. petitioner challenges assessment based on notices. (Para 3 , 4)
3. reference to a previous decision affecting jurisdiction. (Para 5)
4. respondent argues against petition's merit. (Para 6)
5. court's analysis relates to previous rulings. (Para 7)
6. discussion on judicial precedents and jurisdiction. (Para 8)
7. consideration of pending cases in higher courts. (Para 9)
8. final ruling to quash notices and orders. (Para 10)

ORDER :

S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the assessment order dated 21.03.2025 passed under section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 2021-22 by the Respondent No 1 bearing DIN and order No.ITBA/AST/S/147/2024-25/1074835439(1) herein marked as Annexure-A1.

b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Act dated 21.03.2025 for the Assessment Year 2021-22 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2024-25/1074835548(1) herein marked as Annexure-A2.

c) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice dated 21.03.2025 issued under Section 274 r.w.s 270A of the Act for the Assessment Year 2021- 22 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN No.ITBA/ PNL/S/270A/2024-25/1074835534(1)herein marked as Annexure-A.3.

d) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 02.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2021-22 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148_1/2023-24/ 1060431626(1) herein marked as Annexure-B.

e) Issuing appropriate directions to the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) i.e., Respondent No.4 in relation to the appeal pending before it for the assessment year 2021-22.

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

2. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the impugned notices under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the respondent No.1 completed the assessment proceedings and passed the Assessment Order for the Assessment year 2021-22 determining the total income of the petitioner as Rs.39,80,750/-.

4. Aggrieved by the said Assessment Order, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeals before the fourth respondent - appellate authority, which is still pending adjudication.

5. Meanwhile, decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters - dated 28.08.2025, has disposed of the petitions quashing the show cause notice on the ground that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction to issue the notice under section 148 of the Act in the light of Section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Notification pursuant thereto which provided for issuance of notice only by the faceless authority of the respondent. It is therefore submitted that the impugned notice under section 148 of the Act and assessment orders, etc., may be set aside and the present petition be disposed of in terms of the said order. It is also submitted that the necessary directions may be issued to the CIT(A) to dispose of the Appeals, as having become academic/infructuous reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to seek revival/restoration of the appeal/s if the occasion so arises.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents - Revenue submits that there is no merit in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top