- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26577 WP No. 13984 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13984 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI. BHAVANI SHANKAR SHETTY S/O. I. KITTANNA SHETTY AGE 64 YEARS OCC BUSINESS R/AT NO.15, KHATA NO. 76/2, BEGUR HOBLI SINGASAANDRA OFF HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 068 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26577 WP No. 13984 of 2026 KORAMANGALA BANGALORE- 2. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E. I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17/03/2026 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE A.Y 2024-25 IN DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2025 26/1087486877(1) (ANNEXURE-A). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26577 WP No. 13984 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the Assessment Order dated 17.03.2026 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the IT Act'], and the short question presented for consideration is: whether the assessment is concluded after a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Mr. Jeevan J. Neeralgi, the learned counsel for petitioner, submits that the petitioner is not afforded such opportunity and that it is demonstrated by the following. [a] The petitioner is issued with notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the IT Act, and during the course of the proceedings, the petitioner was issued with another Show Cause Notice as against the investment of Rs.2,50,00,000/-. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26577 WP No. 13984 of 2026 [b] The petitioner, on 10.03.2026, filed a request for adjournment which was accepted allowing time upto 14.03.2026. [c] However, the Assessing Officer has closed the Portal, on 13.03.2026 and concluded the assessment by the impugned order dated 17.03.2026 opining that the petitioner has failed to furnish documentary evidence to explain the source of his investment in the purchase of the property. Mr. E. I. Sanmathi, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents, is heard in the light of these circumstances, and this Court must opine that there is a lack of opportunity which Mr. E. I. Sanmathi cannot deny. Therefore, the following: ORDER [A] The petition is allowed-in-part quashing the impugned Assessment Order dated - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26577 WP No. 13984 of 2026 17.03.2026 restoring the assessment proceedings with liberty to the petitioner to file documentary evidence on the source of investment for purchase of the subject property calling upon the second respondent to consider such documentary evidence and pass just orders. [B] It is needless to observe that upon communication of this order, the Authorities shall enable uploading of such documentary evidence. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB