- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 27081 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: KANGADAN MAJEED S/O SRI ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDENT AT SY NO 87 INDIRA LAYOUT BICHANAHALLY KUSHALNAGAR KODAGU 571234 PAN ARJPM2316F …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMWENT CENTRE REP. BY ADDL/JOINT/DEPUTY / ASSISTANT COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM O 401, 2ND FLOOR, E RAMP JAWARHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM DELHI – 110 003 2. THEINCOME TAX OFFICER WARD MADIKERI MADIKERI - SRIVALLI BUILDING MADIKERI MYSURU – 571 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE R1 UNDER SECTION 147 RWS 144 RWS 144B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 21/03/2023 BEARING DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23/1051051105(1) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 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, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the assessment order passed by the Respondent No.1 under section 147 rws 144 rws 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 21/03/2023 bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2022- 23/1051051105(1) for the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A1. (ii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the computation sheet issued by the Respondent No.1 dated 21.03.2023 bearing DIN and Document No: ITBA/AST/S/183/2022-23/1051051210(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A2. iii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice of demand issued under section 156 of the Act by the Respondent No.1 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 dated 21.03.2023 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/156/2022-23/1051051195(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A3. iv) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty order passed under section 271AAC(1) of the Act by the Respondent No.1 dated 21/09/2023 bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/271AAC(1)/2023-24/1056344727(1) in respect of assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A4. v) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the computation sheet issued by the Respondent No.1 dated 21.09.2023 bearing DIN and Document No: ITBA/PNL/S/271AAC(1)/2022-23/1051051206 (1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A5. vi) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice of demand issued under section 156 of the Act by the Respondent No.1 dated 21.09.2023 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/PNL/S/156/2023-24/1056344696(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A6. vii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty order passed under section 270A of the Act by the Respondent - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 No.1 dated 25/09/2023 bearing DIN No. ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2023-24/1056534369(1) in respect of assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A7. viii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the computation sheet issued by the Respondent No.1 dated 25.09.2023 bearing DIN and Document No: ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2022-23/1051051205(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A8. ix) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice of demand issued under section 156 of the Act by the Respondent No.1 dated 25.09.2023 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/PNL/S/156/2023-24/1056533955(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-A9. x) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Act by the Respondent No.2 dated 14.03.2022 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-22/1040719149(1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-B1. xi) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act by the Respondent No.2 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 dated 26.03.2022 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021-22/1041657397 (1) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-B2. xii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice issued under section 148 of the Act by the Respondent No.2 dated 27.03.2022 bearing DIN and Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/148_1/2021-22/1041765973(1) In respect of the assessment year 2018-19 herein marked as Annexure-B3. xiii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, the issue in controversy between the parties is directly and squarely covered by the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Begur Sinappa Venkatesh Vs. The Income Tax Officer and another – W.P.No.20807/2023 dated 16.11.2023, wherein it was held as under: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 “The petitioner has impugned the notice dated 17.03.2022 [Annexure-A] issued by the first respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, the 'IT Act'], the subsequent adjudication order dated 30.03.2022 under Section 148A(d) of the IT Act [Annexure- A1], the notice dated 31.03.2022 under Section 148 of the IT Act [Annexure-A2), the assessment order dated 24.02.2023 under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the IT Act [Annexure-A3] and the consequential penalty orders and demand notices dated 24.08.2023 and 07.07.2023 [Annexures-A4, A5 and A6]. 2. The petitioner's primary grievance is with the notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act and based on this grievance, it is contended that all further proceedings must fail. Sri Ravishankar S V, the learned counsel for the petitioner, canvasses that the first respondent has caused the aforesaid notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act without digital signature and in view of the decision of the High Court of Bombay in Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj vs. Income Tax Officer, reported in [2023] 451 ITR 27 [Bombay], all further proceedings must fail. 3. Sri Ravishankar S V, also submits that during the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2015-16, the petitioner was employed with M/s Varshitha Enterprises, Kunigal; that the proprietor of this enterprise was not keeping good health and therefore had issued necessary mandate to the petitioner to operate the concern's bank account maintained with the Indian Overseas Bank; that the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 petitioner, bona fide and not intending to disturb the proprietor who was not keeping good health, credited the cash received from the sale of currency to recharge mobiles and utilized the deposits to disburse the same to the Telecom operator, M/s Idea Cellular. 4. 4. Sri Ravishankar S V further submits that the details of these cash deposits and the disbursement to M/s Idea Cellular are reflected in the Income-tax returns filed on behalf of the proprietary concern in PAN AJGPV 3120P; that during the subsequent the petitioner assessment year, commenced his own business under the name and style 'M/s Gagan Enterprises' selling currency for mobile recharge; that the cash deposits even during this subsequent assessment year is treated as income is business income; the petitioner's determined at the rate of 3% of the gross turn over; that the petitioner would not be liable for any income tax for the relevant assessment year and even otherwise if cash deposits are treated as gross business turn over, the petitioner's liability will be below Rs.3,00,000/- at the rate of 3% and hence, the first respondent cannot assume jurisdiction to initiate proceedings. 5. Sri Ravishankar S V, relying upon the aforesaid circumstances, submits that for these reasons and in view of the indisputable fact that the notice under Section 148A(b) is not digitally signed, the proceedings must fail. Sri M. Dilip submits that he cannot contest the assertion that 148A(b) notice is not digitally signed especially when the adjudication order under Section 148A(d) and the subsequent - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 proceedings are digitally signed or that in very similar circumstances, the High Court of Bombay in Prakash Krishnavtar Bharadwaj vs. Income Tax Officer supra has held that because the notice is not signed either digitally or manually, the same would be invalid and because such notice is invalid, no jurisdiction would vest with the first respondent to continue the proceedings pursuant to such notice. 6. However, Sri M.Dilip, submits that the authorities must be reserved with liberty to issue fresh notice if it could be permissible given the provisions of Section 149 of the IT Act. In rejoinder, Sri Ravishankar S V, submits that in the event the writ petition is being disposed of on this limited ground, this Court may observe that any further proceedings shall be initiated in the light of the defence that is canvassed in this petition. 7. The rival submissions are considered and this Court must opine that with the authorities being unable to dispute that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the IT Act is not either digitally or manually signed and with the proposition enunciated by the High Court of Bombay in the aforesaid decision being applicable on all fours to this case, the petition must be disposed of on the ground that the first respondent could not have continued the proceedings based on 148A(b) 17.03.2022. However, the authorities must be reserved with liberty, subject to all just exceptions in law, to initiate further proceedings. Hence, the following - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 ORDER The petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated 17.03.2022 issued by the first respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [Annexure-A], the subsequent adjudication order dated 30.03.2022 under Section 148A(d) [Annexure-A1] of the IT Act, the notice dated 31.03.2022 under Section 148 of the IT Act [Annexure- A2], the assessment order dated 24.02.2023 under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the IT Act [Annexure-A3] and the consequential penalty orders and demand notices dated 24.08.2023 and 07.07.2023 [Annexures-A4, A5 and A6] are quashed.” 4. Under these circumstances, the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned orders/notices at Annexures-A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, B1, B2 and B3 dated 21.03.2023, 21.03.2023, 21.03.2023, 21.09.2023, 21.09.2023, 21.09.2023, 25.09.2023, - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43285 WP No. 27081 of 2023 25.09.2023, 25.09.2023, 14.03.2022, 26.03.2022 and 27.03.2022, respectively are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65