Kunal Chaubey v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 2963 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN: KUNAL CHAUBEY S/O DADAN CHAUBEY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO K-802, AJMERA INFINITY, NEELADRI ROAD, NEAR WIPRO GATE-16, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, DODDATHOGURU, BENGALURU-560100. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADITYA BHAT., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX., KARNATAKA AND GOA, BENGALURU CR BUILDING, NO. 1, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶2ASSESMENT UNIT REPRESENTED BY INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:8315 WP(No.(2963(of(2026 NEW,DELHI,-,110,003.,

3., ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,, OF,INCOME,TAX,DEPARTMENT,CIRCLE,3(3)(1),, BENGALURU,HMT,BHAWAN,,NO.59,,, BELLARY,ROAD,,GANGANAGAR,,, BENGALURU-,590,032., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,M.THIRUMALESH.,,ADVOCATE), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,ISSUE,A,WRIT,OF, CERTIORARI, QUASHING, SHOW, CAUSE, NOTICE, DATED,

03.01.2024, BEARING, DIN, AND, NOTICE, NO., ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2023-24/1059338294(1), ISSUED, BY, RESPONDENT,NO.3,UNDER,SECTION,148A(B),,PRODUCED,AT, ANNEXURE-A.,,AND,ETC., , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,S,SUNIL,DUTT,YADAV ORAL(ORDER , Sri.,M.,Thirumalesh,,learned,counsel,is,directed,to,accept, notice,for,the,respondents., , 2., The, petitioner, has, sought, for, setting, aside, of, the, Assessment,Order,at,Annexure-'D',dated,30.01.2025.,,It,is,the, case, of, the,petitioner, that, due, to, undue, hardship, relating, to, financial, loss, during, Covid-19, Pandemic,, the, petitioner, was,

forced to repay the debts by making payments through Credit Cards and such payments have been deemed to be unexplained expenditure and the proceedings have been initiated.

¶3It is submitted that due to bona-fide lapse arising out of the reasons which are genuine, the petitioner was unable to make out a reply to the Show Cause Notice issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['the Act' for brevity], which has culminated in an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and subsequently, the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued. It is further submitted that the entirety of proceedings would not have culminated in an order, if the petitioner had made out a reply to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) itself.

¶4It is submitted that there are discrepancies in the variation proposed. It is further submitted that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, which details information, would prima facie reveal that the subject matter of proceedings was relating to payments made from Credit Cards. Accordingly, it is submitted that, if the matter is remitted to the stage of

proceedings under Section 148A(b) of the Act, the petitioner would be in a position to explain.

¶5Learned counsel Sri M. Thirumalesh for the respondents submits that the assessee has made out a petition to the Commissioner seeking condonation of delay for filing of the returns as regards to which no order is passed.

¶6Heard both sides.

¶7It is the case of the petitioner that he has substantive material to make out a reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act and having perused the notice issued under Section 148A(b) and the Annexures, the explanation of the petitioner that is made herein, if permitted to be made before the respondent Authority, would be appropriate for the Authority to consider the same.

¶8Notwithstanding that the petitioner has sought for condonation of delay in filing of the returns, but accepting the contentions of the petitioner that he needs to be given an opportunity to make out a reply to the notice under Section

148A(b) of the Act, it would be appropriate to remit the matter for reconsideration.

¶9In the light of the contentions raised, it would meet the ends of justice by setting aside the order at Annexure-'B' dated 21.02.2024 and remitting the matter to the stage of reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The consequential proceedings at Annexures-D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N and P are also set aside. Consequent to the order passed, the respondent-Authority to rescind the debit-freeze instructions made to the bank of the petitioner.

¶10The petitioner to appear before the jurisdictional Assessing Officer on 02.03.2026 without awaiting fresh notice and make out a reply to the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

¶11The petitioner to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks Benevolent Trust, High Court Building, Bengaluru.

¶12The respondent-Authorities to take appropriate steps to rescind the instructions at Annexure-R, upon receipt of certified copy of this order.

In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE HR