Karnataka High Court
Chandrashekar Huf vs National Faceless Assessment Centre on 6 October, 2023
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:36300
WP No. 16134 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 16134 OF 2023 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
CHANDRASHEKAR HUF
SRI R S CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O SRI R SHANUMUKAIAH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
1A, NITTUR POST
GUBBI TALUK, N RAMPURA
TUMKUR -572223.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHREEHARI KUTSA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE
A CENTRE DESCRIBED UNDER
SECTION 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Digitally ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP
signed by JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM
NARASIMHA
MURTHY DELHI-110003
VANAMALA
Location:
REP BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF
HIGH COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(NEAC).
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS TUMKUR
AAYAKAR BHAVAN,
RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, KUNIGAL ROAD
TUMKUR - 572 103.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SUSHAL TIWARI.,ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:36300
WP No. 16134 of 2023
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH
THE DIGITALLY SIGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT U/S
143(3) R.W.S. 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
DATED 31/05/2021 ISSUED BY THE R-1 FOR THE AY
2018-19 WHICH BEARS THE DIN VIZ.,
ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1033199372(1) WHICH IS
ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A; QUASH THE DIGITALLY
SIGNED NOTICE OF DEMAND U/S 156 OF THE INCOME
TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 31/05/2021 ISSUED BY THE R-1
FOR THE AY 2018-19 WHICH BEARS THE DIN VIZ.,
ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1033199431(1) WHICH IS
ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A2 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has impugned the assessment order dated 31.05.2021 [Annexure-A1] under Section 143[3] read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the IT Act'] and the consequential demand after the order levying penalty under Section 271AAC[1] of the IT Act. The notices and the aforesaid penalty order are produced as Annexures- A2, B1 and B2.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:36300 WP No. 16134 of 2023
2. Sri Shreehari Kutsa, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Sushal Tiwari, the learned counsel for the respondents, are heard for final disposal of the petition in view of the petitioner's limited ground that the impugned assessment order is passed without considering the petitioner's reply only on the ground that the documents filed along with reply are in vernacular.
3. The petitioner submits that the income brought to tax now is his agricultural income, and to demonstrate the same, the petitioner along with reply dated 31.10.2020 has submitted RTC for the lands owned by him and other records including Crop Certification to substantiate his case that the income is from agricultural lands. In fact, this is borne out by the following impugned assessment order.
"In its reply dated 31.10.2020 the assessee has submitted RTC certificate in regional language without any covering letter.
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:36300
WP No. 16134 of 2023
The assessee has not provided any
documents related to agriculture income such as details of agriculture land, kind of agriculture activities carried out, details of agriculture produce, documentary evidences related to the expenses incurred for agriculture activities, details of parties to whom the agriculture produce was sold etc. Assessee was asked to submit the documents in support of the agricultural Income shown in ITR, but assessee choose not to reply nor submit any documents related to his income under the head agricultural income. The onus was on the assessee to substantiate his claim that the income derived by him during the year was from agriculture activities. In view of the above, the gross agricultural income of Rs. 64,49,239/- for the AY 2018-19 is added back to the return income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the IT Act under head income from other sources and taxed as per provisions of section 115BBE of I.T. Act 1961. Since the assessee has under reported his income the penalty proceedings u/s 270A are being initiated separately."
4. This Court must opine that if the documents are produced to substantiate a particular -5- NC: 2023:KHC:36300 WP No. 16134 of 2023 stand, and for any reason the authorities require a translation or better information, especially when documents are furnished in the local language, they must call upon the assessee to produce the same. The failure to consider the documents which could have a bearing on the final outcome would be impermissible in law and in violation of settled principles. Therefore, this Court must interfere on this limited ground and restore the assessment proceedings.
5. Sri Sushal Tiwari, at this stage, submits that the petitioner could contend that the proceedings would be time barred, and in response Sri Shreehari K submits that the petitioner in the circumstances of this case where he on his own initiative did not file the translation of all the documents, cannot take up the defense of the assessment being now time barred. This submission must be taken on record to ensure that the Revenue's -6- NC: 2023:KHC:36300 WP No. 16134 of 2023 interest is not impaired when the interference is in the grounds as aforesaid. Hence the following:
ORDER [a] The petition is allowed in part, and the impugned assessment order dated 31.05.2021 and the consequential Notices and penalty orders [Annexures-A1, A2, B1 and B2].
[b] The proceedings are restored for reassessment and the second respondent is called upon to take all such measures as may be necessary to facilitate assessment after due opportunity to the petitioner to file translation of the documents in the local language.
Sd/-
JUDGE AN/-