ITO Vs Smt. Ramegowda Chandrakala (Karnataka High Court)
Karnataka High Court Reiterates: Notice Under Section 148A(b) Granting Less Than Seven Days for Reply Is Unsustainable
The Karnataka High Court dismissed the Revenue’s writ appeal, holding that the issue was fully covered by its earlier Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 1141/2026. The Revenue argued that the requirement of granting a minimum of seven days to respond to a notice under Section 148A(b) was merely directory, as the Assessing Officer could extend the period for compliance up to thirty days.
Rejecting this contention, the Court reaffirmed that a notice issued under Section 148A(b) allowing less than seven days for compliance is invalid in law. Once the foundational notice is held to be unsustainable, all consequential proceedings-including the order under Section 148A(d), the notice under Section 148, the reassessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144, and the penalty notices issued under Sections 271AAC(1) and 272A(1)(d)-also become unsustainable. As the facts of the present case were identical to those considered in the earlier Division Bench decision, the Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Heard learned counsel Sri.Thirumalesh M appearing for the appellants and learned counsel Sri.S V Ravishankar appearing for the respondent.
