THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ALTISOURCE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE – Respondent
WP 33909/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 33909 OF 2025 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
ALTISOURCE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,
C/O ALTISOURCE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
PRIVATE LIMITED,
VAISHNAVI TECH PARK, GROUND FLOOR,
TOWER C, OUTER RING ROAD, BELLANDUR,
BANGALORE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA,
INDIA-560 103.
PAN AAAC09467A
REP. BY SOMNATH MITRA,
DIRECTOR,
REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI VISHWANATH K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE,
BENGALURU, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,
BENGALURU-560 500.
Digitally signed 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (SYSTEMS),
by NANDINI R
POST BOX NO.2, ELECTRONIC CITY POST,
Location: HIGH
BENGALURU-560 500.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CIRCLE 1(1)(1),
BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK,
NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE,
KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU-560 095.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BMTC BUILDING,
80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK,
NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE,
KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU-560 095.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2;
SRI M DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 & R-4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR I) QUASHING OR SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OR INTIMATION HAVING (DIN) CPC/1415/G8A/538571969 DATED 24.04.2025 PASSED OR ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 245 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE AY 2014-15 (ANNEXURE-A) ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"WHEREFORE, the petitioner, most humbly and respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or directions:
i). Quashing or setting aside the impugned notice or intimation having (DIN) CPC/1415/G8a/538571969 dated 24.04.2025 passed or issued by the 1st Respondent under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the AY 2014-15 (Annexure-A);
ii) Directing the 1st/3rd/4th Respondent to forthwith grant refund of Rs.52,44,682/- being the amount illegally adjusted / recovered in excess of 20% of demand for AY 2020-21 vide challans dated 05.06.2025 (Annexure-B) along with applicable interest thereon and grant refund of Rs.3,19,30,033/- being the amount illegally adjusted/recovered in excess of 20% of demand for AY 2021-22 vide challans dated 05.06.2025 (Annexure-B) along with applicable interest thereon;
iii) Directing the respondents not to enforce or initiate or pursue any proceedings for recovery or adjustment of the balance demand of tax and interest for the AY 2020-21 and AY 2021-22 arising from final assessment order no. ITBA/ AST/ S/ 143(3)/2024-25/1066952726(1) dated 23.07.2024 and assessment order no. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2024- 25/1069955817(1) dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure-C and D) which is pending for disposal before Hon'ble ITAT vide Ack no. 1726862449 for IT(TP)A No.1843 and Ack no. 1800005150 for ITTPA No. 2473/Bang/2024 respectively (Annexure E) and for a period of three weeks thereafter; and iv) Pass or grant such other order or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case 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. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to the refund granted/sanction in favour of the petitioner for the assessment year 2014-15. Subsequently, the Respondents passed final assessment orders for the Assessment years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 against the petitioner and raised demands which were challenged by the petitioner before the appellate authority by depositing 20% of the disputed tax pursuant to the assessment order.
4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the petitioner had deposited 20% of the disputed tax at the time
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.