SHRIKANT HARIRAM DEOKAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER — WP/16441/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226,227. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

Next hearing 16-Jun-2026

CNR: KAHC010365332026

Filing Number

WP/16651/2026

Filing Date

02-Jun-2026

Registration No

WP/16441/2026

Registration Date

04-Jun-2026

Judge

B M Shyam Prasad

Coram

B M Shyam Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 144 )

Sub-Category

IT-Income Tax Act ( 111 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRIKANT HARIRAM DEOKAR

    Adv. A MAHESH CHOWDHARY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.INCOME TAX OFFICER

  2. 2.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARED 5(

  3. 3.(

  4. 4., BANGALORE

  5. 5.THE ADDL.JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

Case History

  1. 16-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matter/S

    B M Shyam Prasad

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    B M Shyam PrasadView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 16441/2026 Petitioner Shrikant Hariram Deokar challenged an ex-parte Income Tax Assessment Order dated 16.12.2019, claiming he was unaware of the notices and order until recently. The High Court of Karnataka adjourned the case, directing the respondent Income Tax Officer to accept notice and secure instructions for disposal. The petition was re-listed for 16.06.2026 for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 09-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 02-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/16441/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 16441/2026 Petitioner Shrikant Hariram Deokar challenged an ex-parte Income Tax Assessment Order dated 16.12.2019, claiming he was unaware of the notices and order until recently. The High Court of Karnataka adjourned the case, directing the respondent Income Tax Officer to accept notice and secure instructions for disposal. The petition was re-listed for 16.06.2026 for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case