Pr. Commissioner Of vs Rajkumar C (Huf)
2021 Latest Caselaw 616 Kant

                                 1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                          PRESENT

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                             AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

                   I.T.A. NO.504 OF 2016
BETWEEN:

1.     PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4
       BMTC COMPLEX, KORMANGALA.

2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
       CIRCLE-7(1), BANGALORE.
                                            ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,)

AND:

RAJKUMAR C (HUF)
NO.259/B, 7TH CROSS
HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-I
BANGALORE-560102
PAN:AAMHR4074B.
                                            ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAJESH CHANDER KUMAR, ADV.)
                             ---
      THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX
ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 27.04.2016 PASSED
IN ITA NO.1380/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-
07, PRAYING TO:
      DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH
OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE
HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE
ORDER DATED 27-04-2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'A' BENCH,
BENGALURU,       IN     APPEAL   PROCEEDINGS      IN   ITA
                             2



NO.1380/BANG/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, AS
SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL; AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER
RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

     THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING,         THIS      DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                      JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax

Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)

has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter

of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2006-07.

The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide

order dated 21.11.2017 on the following substantial

questions of law:

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in setting aside the re-assessment order passed by the assessing authority by holding that the are no valid reasons recorded by the assessing authority to invoke re-assessment proceedings under section 147 even when the assessing authority has given valid reasons for invoking re-assessment proceedings and

all the ingredients of section 147 are satisfied in the case of assessee to invoke re-assessment proceedings?".

2. Today, the appeal is admitted on the

following additional substantial question of law:

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in law in holding that re-assessment order is bad in law ignoring Section 150 read with Section 153 and Explanation 2 to Section 153 of the Act whereby Assessing Authority is empowered to include any income excluded from total income of one persona and held to be the income of another person, then an assessment of such income on such other person shall be deemed to be one made in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in the said order?'

3. For the reasons assigned by us in the

judgment passed by us today in I.T.A.No.503/2016,

since, the order of assessment has been passed by the

tribunal without taking note of Section 150 read with

Section 153 as well as Explanation 2 to Section 153 of

the Act, we answer the additional substantial question

of law in favour of the revenue and against the

assessee. Therefore, we do not propose to deal with the

rival contentions. The order passed by the tribunal dated

27.04.2016 is quashed and the tribunal is directed to

decide the appeal by taking into account the provisions

of Section 150 and Section 153 of the Act after affording

an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

In the result, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE ss