- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 36398 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: KALKURA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS OPPOSITE PALIMARU MUTT, CAR STREET, UDUPI, KARNATAKA – 576 101. A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND MANAGING PARTNER, MR. RANJAN KALKURA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V. RAGHURAMAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. UDAY SHANKAR R. M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION INTERIM BOARD OF SETTLEMENT-I, 9TH FLOOR, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN C WING, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI – 110 003. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, ALBUQUERQUE HOUSE, PANDESHWAR, MANGALURU – 575 001. 3. KARNATAKA BANK 1ST FLOOR, DURGA INTERNATIONAL BUILDING, UDUPI, MALPE ROAD, UDUPI – 576 101. 4. VIJAYA BANK UDUPI MAIN BRANCH, SUREKHA BUILDING, K M MARG, MARUTI VEETHIKA, UDUPI – 576 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. K.V. SHYAM PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. NAGARJ N. DAMODAR, ADVOCAET FOR R4) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 30.12.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 ENCLOSED 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, the petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “(a) Writ or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 bearing No.KA/BACC/07/2020-21/IT passed by the Respondent No.1 enclosed as Annexure-A; (b) Writ or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash the impugned order dated 02.07.2024 bearing no. KA/BACC/037/2020-21/IT passed by the Respondent No.1 enclosed as Annexure-B; (c) Direct the Respondent No.1 by an appropriate writ or Order in the nature of Mandamus or otherwise consider the application for settlement afresh, in light of the settled judicial precedents; (d) Issue a writ or certiorari or any other direction or order to quash the notice bearing DIN no. ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)_1/2024-25/1070966966(1) dated - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 06.12.2024 issued by Respondent No.3, enclosed as Annexure-R. (e) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other direction or order to quash notice bearing DIN ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)_1/2024-25/1070968216(1) dated 06.12.2024 issued by Respondent No.3, enclosed as Annexure-S. (f) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other direction or order to quash notice bearing DIN ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)_1/2024-25/1070968609(1) dated 06.12.2024 issued by Respondent No.3, enclosed as Annexure-T. (g) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other direction or order to quash notice bearing DIN ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)_1/2024-25/1070968997(1) dated 06.12.2024 issued by Respondent No.4, enclosed as Annexure-U. (h) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 to release/defreeze the bank account of the Petitioner and refund the amounts with interest, if any, which have been recovered. (i) Grant such other reliefs as this Honourable High Court may think fit including the cost of this writ petition.” 2. Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the material on record. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Settlement commission, all cases pending before the said Commission were transferred to respondent No.1 – Income Tax Settlement Commission, Interim Board of Settlement-I, has proceeded to consider the claim of the petitioner and passed order dated 30.12.2023 under Section 245D(4) of the Income Tax Act. Since various contentions urged by the petitioner and documents produced by them were not considered by respondent No.1, the petitioner filed a rectification application dated 21.02.2024, which also came to be rejected vide impugned order dated 02.07.2024 mechanically reiterating the earlier order dated 30.12.2023. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 30.12.2023 and the impugned order dated 02.07.2024, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents jointly submit that there is not merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 5. A perusal of the material on record, in particular, the order dated 30.12.2023 and 02.07.2024 will indicate that the various contentions urged by the petitioner having not been considered by respondent No.1 – Commission/Board while passing the aforesaid order, by adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner to put forth all contentions and enable respondent No.1 to reconsider the matter afresh, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents-Revenue submits that pursuant to the order dated 30.12.2023, respondents have recovered certain sums of money from the petitioner and till disposal of the proceedings afresh, by respondent No.1 – Income Tax Settlement Commission, Interim Board of Settlement-I, the parties may be directed to maintain status quo as regards the impugned recovery by respondent No.1. 7. The said submission is placed on record. 8. In the result, I pass the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45082 WP No. 36398 of 2024 ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned orders dated 30.12.2023 and 02.07.2024 at Annexures-A and B, respectively, passed by respondent No.1 and the impugned notices both dated 06.12.2024 at Annexures-R and S, respectively, issued by respondent No.3 are hereby quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law. (iv) Further, till disposal of the proceedings afresh, by respondent No.1 – Income Tax Settlement Commission, Interim Board of Settlement-I, the parties are directed to maintain status quo as regards the impugned recovery by respondent No.1. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 74