SRI LIKITH DAYANANDA GOWDA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3)(2) BENGALURU
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 28446 OF 2026 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
SRI LIKITH DAYANANDA GOWDA
S/O S DAYANANDA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 298, 5TH CROSS,
1ST STAGE, I PHASE, GOKULA,
BANGALORE - 560054.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT.MONISHA SEN., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3)(2)
BENGALURU, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,
BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,
6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE,
KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560095.
2. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE
REP BY ADD/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
INCOME TAX OFFICER
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT - 510 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. NIRMAL MATHEW., ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 22.08.2024 PASSED
UNDER SECTION 148A(D) OF THE INCOME-TAX 1961,
BEARING DIN-ACT, ITBA/AST/F/148A/2024-
25/1067885588(1), AND PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B,
ALONG WITH THE CONSEQUENTIAL NOTICE DATED
22.08.2024 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE
INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, BEARING DIN AND NOTICE
NO. ITBA/AST/S/148.1/2024-25/1067885784(1) FOR
REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PETITIONER
FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19, PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-C AS BEING WITHOUT JURISDICTION,
CONTRARY TO LAW AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN THE
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE;
(2) QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
19.01.2026 PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH
SECTIONS 144 AND 144B OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,
1961, BEARING DIN ITBA/AST/S/147/2025-
26/1084933940(1), PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H.
ALONG WITH THE CONSEQUENTIAL NOTICE OF
DEMAND DATED 19.01.2026 ISSUED UNDER SECTION
156 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-H1, DIN-ITBA/AST/S/156/2025-
26/1084933950(1), AS BEING WITHOUT JURISDICTION,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
CONTRARY TO LAW AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN THE
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE;
(3) QUASHING THE SCN, DATED 19.01.2026, BEARING
DIN-ITBA/PNL/S/272A(I)(D).FL/2025-26/ 1084917380(1)
GIVING ARISE TO THE INITIATION OF PENALTY
PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTIONS 274 R/W SS
272A(1)(D) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 PRODUCED
AS ANNEXURE-J; (4) QUASHING THE ISSUE LETTER
CLAIMING DEMAND U/S 144 OF THE ACT, 1961,
DATED 22.07.2026, BEARING DIN-
ITBARCV/F/17/2026-27/1091348709(1), ARISING OUT
OF THE INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER
SECTIONS 274 R/W SS 272A(1)(D) OF THE INCOME-TAX
ACT, 1961 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, who has joined his family
members in executing the Sale Deed dated
18.08.2018 to transfer an immovable property and
which forms the basis for Assessment Order dated
19.01.2026, has called in question the following:
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
Sl.
No.
Notices/
Orders
Provisions
Date of Income
Tax Act,
1961
Annexures
1 Assessment 19.01.2026 144 and H
Order 144B
2 Demand 19.01.2026 156 H1
Notice
3 Show Cause 19.01.2026 272A(1)(d) J
Notice
4 Letter 22.07.2026 144 K
2. Ms. Monisha Sen, the learned counsel for
the petitioner, submits that this Court must interfere
and quash all the proceedings including the notice
under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
[for short, ‘the IT Act’ ] dated 09.08.2024 because the
proceedings are commenced treating the entire
payment of sale consideration under the Sale Deed as
received by the petitioner notwithstanding the fact
that the entire sale consideration is distributed
amongst the vendors and that the petitioner has only
received a sum of Rs.43,87,804/- with corresponding
TDS as well.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
3. Ms. Monisha Sen emphasizes that if the
petitioner has only received a sum of Rs.43,87,804/-
as consideration, even if it could be contended that
this has escaped assessment, it would be below the
threshold of Rs.50,00,000/-, a condition precedent
for commencement of the proceedings under Section
149 of the IT Act without availing the extended period
of limitation. The learned counsel also submits that
though TDS is affected for each of the vendor
corresponding to the portion of the total
consideration received by them, the proceedings are
only initiated against the petitioner.
4. As regards the petitioner's failure to
participate in the 148 proceedings, the learned
counsel can plead bona fides . The question for
interference is examined in the light of these
circumstances upon hearing Mr. Nirmal Mathew, who
accepts notice for the respondents along with
Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, a learned senior standing counsel
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
for the respondents. In fact, Mrs. Monisha Sen
proposes to rely upon this Court's order dated
07.12.2023 in Pramila Mahadev Tadkase vs
1
Income Tax Officer to assert that in very similar
circumstances this Court has interfered to quash
even the Notice under Section 148A of the IT Act.
5. However, it is seen that in the aforesaid
case, the petitioner therein had filed a detailed
response and the proceedings were continued
resulting in an order under Section 148 of the IT Act
without considering the response. Though there is
similarity in the circumstances, in the present case
the petitioner can only plead bona fides and rely
upon a Sale Deed which is not even presented at the
stage of enquiry under Section 148A of the IT Act.
1
[2024] 158 taxmann.com 246
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
6. If indeed the petitioner can, based on the
terms of the Sale Deed and the remittances that
could be towards TDS, substantiate that he has only
received Rs.43,87,804/- as an amount far below the
threshold for commencement of proceedings, these
will have to be considered. This Court, because the
petitioner pleads bona fides , is of the view that there
must be limited interference to restore the
proceedings to the stage of Section 148A of the IT Act
with liberty to the petitioner to file a response with all
the documents including the appropriate affirmation
from the co-vendors. Hence, the following:
ORDER
[A] The petition is allowed-in-part quashing the
following:
Sl.
No.
Notices/
Orders
Provisions
Date of Income
Tax Act,
1961
Annexures
1 Assessment 19.01.2026 144 and H
Order 144B
2 Demand 19.01.2026 156 H1
Notice
3 Show Cause 19.01.2026 272A(1)(d) J
Notice
4 Letter 22.07.2026 144 K
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53977
WP No. 28446 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010622192026
[B] The petitioner without further notice shall
file response to the Notice under Section
148A (b) of the IT Act with the first
respondent by 26.11.2026 .
[C] It is needless to observe that the first
respondent shall consider all questions as
they are left open to be considered.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
SA
Ct:sr