IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 5919 OF 2022 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

M/S REKHI INVESTMENTS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, MR.CHARANJEET SINGH REKHI, S/O KULDEEP SINGH REKHI, AGED 44 YEARS,, NO.13, 13^TH A MAIN, GREENVIEW APARTMENTS, DOOR NO.001, HAL 2^ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 008.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. LAVA M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOEM TAX Digitally CIRCLE-1(1) BANGALORE signed by BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, CHANDANA

6^TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, B M KORAMANGALA, Location:

BANGALORE – 560 095.

High Court of Karnataka

2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6^TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095.

3. THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, REP. BY ADDL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMET AX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2^ND FLOOR, E RAMP JAWARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI – 110 003.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 30.03.2021 ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 BEARING DIN AND NOTICE HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

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

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:-

“i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 30.03.2021 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2014-15 bearing DIN & Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1031944936(1) herein marked as Annexure-A.

ii) Declare that the Respondents are not entitled in seeking information from the petitioner regarding the source of source in respect of the transactions undertaken by the partner of the petitioner firm during the assessment year 2013-14 when the proceedings of the petitioner firm is for assessment year 2014-15 on the fact and circumstances of the case.

iii) Declare that the entire proceedings on the petitioner firm are in violation of the principles of natural justice.

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

2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the impugned notice issued by the respondent under Section 148 of the I.T. Act has not been signed either digitally, electronically or physically. Under identical circumstances in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 and another Vs. M/s. Yeshoda Electricals – ITA No.261/2021 C/w ITA No.264/2021 Dated24.09.2025, the Division Bench of this Court has held as under:

“Heard Sri E.I. Sanmathi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellants-Revenue, and Smt. Krishika Vaishnav, learned counsel for Sri A. Mahesh Chowdhary, respondent-Assessee.

2. These appeals filed by the Revenue are under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), impugning the common order dated 03.02.2021 in ITA No.1175/Bang/2016 and ITA No.1176/Bang/2016 for the Assessment Year 2007-08, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ITAT’).

3. Both appeals are admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law:

"(1) "Whether the Tribunal was right in law in quashing re-assessment order by holding that notice issued is unsigned when same is curable under section 292B of the Act which provides for cure of any mistake, defect or omission in such notice"?

(2) "Whether the ord