Ita/406/2012 Of Dr. Harsha N. Billangady v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020. PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD LT.A. NO.406 OF 2012 BETWEEN: DR. HARSHA N. BILLANGADY|#95, 3 MATN|DOLLARS LAYOUT4 PHASE, J.P. NAGARBANGALORE-5600 7/8 — ADPELLANT. (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL A/WSRI. M. LAVA, ADV.,) | AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE-5(1), 6 FLOORUNITY BUILDING ANNEXEMISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560027. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,196L ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 20.0/7.2012 PASSED IN ITANO.1298/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09,|PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: (1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW.STATED THEREIN. (1) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO.THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY|THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1298/BANG/2011 DATED 20-07-2012. THISLIACOMINGONFOR.HEARING,THISALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:JUDGMENT DAY, This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax| Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)Nas been preferred by the assessee. Tne subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 22.07.2013 on the following substantialquestion of law: (1)Whether the Tribunal or the’authorities below was Justified in rejectingthe claim of the assessee for deduction|under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act,1961 from the facts and circumstances ofthe case? 2 |After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this court passed the following additional substantialquestion of law. (i) Whether the order passed by the.Assessing Officer without issuing proper|notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on|the original return filed by the assessee is non est in the eye of law? 3.We have heard the learned counsel for theparties. The assessee had filed the return of incomeunder Section 139(4) of the Act on 18.03.2009 declaringa total income of Rs.46,58,720/-. Thereafter, theassessee filed the revised return under Section 139(5)of the Act on 23.11.7009. It is the case of the assesseethat considering the revised return of the assessee,notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on26.08.2010 and therefore, the notice issued underSection 143(2) of the Act is non est in the eye of law. ©Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted thatthe issue with regard to validity of the notice underSection 143(2) of the Act requires factual adjudication. ©Even otherwise, the aforesaid question has been raisedby the assessee for the first time in this appeal. | Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case,we deem it appropriate to quash the order dated20.07.2012 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal and remit the matter to the Tribunal fordecision afresn in accordance witn law. All contentions available to both the parties are kept open. In the result, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/-—JUDGE.Sd/-JUDGE.