- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32396-DB WA No. 611 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL No. 611 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA AND GOA REGION, GROUND FLOOR, CR BUILDING No.1 QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(2)(5), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL) AND: 1. SMT. KOMARLA YOGENDRA KEERTANA, D/O SHIVAKUMAR KOTA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A 6, FLAT No.104, NR SREEGLITZ, FIRST FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE-560018, PAN CARD AVAPK2949K. …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32396-DB WA No. 611 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.01.2024 IN WRIT PETITION No.10266 OF 2023 (T-IT) PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) This appeal by revenue filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 09.01.2024 in W.P. No.10266/2023, whereunder the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the notice issued by the appellant-revenue under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 solely on the ground that a minimum period of seven days was not provided to the respondent herein to respond to the notice, reserving liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. 2. Heard Sri. E.I. Sanmathi, learned Senior Standing counsel for the appellants, and perused the entire writ appeal papers. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32396-DB WA No. 611 of 2024 3. The parties to the proceedings would be referred to as before the Writ Court. The appellants were respondents and the respondent herein was the petitioner. 4. Petitioner approached the learned Single Judge questioning, Section 148A(b), notice dated 24.03.2022, mainly urging that the notice would not provide seven days' time to respond to the said notice. The learned Single Judge under the impugned order quashed the said notice, accepting the contention of the petitioner and reserving liberty to the respondent-revenue to initiate appropriate proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue, in addition to the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal submits that the time provided under Section 148A(b) is not mandatory and it is directory. 6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions urged by the appellant-revenue. However, we are not in a position to accept the contention of the appellant- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32396-DB WA No. 611 of 2024 revenue in view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench dated 05.08.2025 in W.A. No.612/2025. 7. Admittedly, in the instant case, Section 148A(b) notice is dated 24.03.2022, which is placed on record as Anneuxre-A, calling upon the petitioner to reply on or before 29.03.2022. Section 148A requires providing of minimum seven days' notice to the assessee to respond to the said notice. The Co-ordinate Bench in the decision (supra), considering identical contention at paragraph No.5, has held as follows: " 5. It is clear from the plain reading of Clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act, that a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act is required to provide an opportunity to the assessee to respond to the information which may suggests that the assessee's income has escaped assessment. The minimum period of such notice is stipulated as "not less than seven days". In the present case, the impugned notice was issued on 20.03.2022 and the Assessee was called upon to furnish a reply on or before 25.03.2022. Indisputably, the impugned notice did not comply with the requirement of providing - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32396-DB WA No. 611 of 2024 a minimum period of seven days to respond to the said notice." 8. There is no reason to disagree with the above decision. Therefore, respectfully following the above decision, the present appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43