Ita/505/2016 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Rajkumar C (Huf)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF JANUARY 2071PRESENT| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’‘’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASW A BETWEEN: LT.A. NCO.505 OF 2016 1.|PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4. BMTC COMPLEX, KORMANGALA. 2 |DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1), BANGALORE. (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,)- .., APPELLANTS. AND" RAJKUMAR C (HUF)NO.259/B, 7TH CROSS|HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-IBANGALORE-5601L02PAN: AAMHR4O/4B. .., 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 PASSEDIN ITA NO.1381/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200/708, PRAYING TO: DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH.OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THEHON BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE.ORDER DATED 27-04-2016 PASSED BY THE ITAT, A BENCH,BENGALURU, LN|APPEAL|PROCEEDINGSIN|LIA NO.1381/BANG/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, ASSOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL; AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER:RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS I.7T.A. COMING ON FOR’ HEARING, THIS’ DAY, |ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: | JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 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 2007-08.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 21.11.2017 on the following substantial|questions of law:| “Whether, on tne facts and in the}circumstances of the case, the Tribunal isright in setting aside the re-assessmentorder passed by the assessing authority byholding that the are no valid reasonsrecorded by the assessing authority toinvoke re-assessment proceedings undersection 147 even when the assessingautnority nas given valid reasons forinvoking re-assessment proceedings and all the ingredients of section 14/7 areSatisfied in the case of assessee to invokere-assessment proceedings? ’. 2 |Today, the appeal is admitted on thefollowing 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 toSection 1535 of the Act whereby AssessingAuthority is empowered to include anyincome excluded from total income of one|persona and held to be the income of anotherperson, then an assessment of such income.on such other person shall be deemed to beone made in consequence of or to give effect|to any finding or direction contained in the)Said order?’ 3For the reasons assigned by us in thejudgment passed by us today in I.7T.A.No.503/2016,since, the order of assessment has been passed by the tribunal without taking note of Section 150 read withSection 153 as well as Explanation 2 to Section 153 ofthe Act, we answer the additional substantial question.of law in favour of the revenue and against theassessee. Therefore, we do not propose to deal with therival contentions. The order passed by the tribunal dated2/.04.2016 is quashed and the tribunal is directed todecide the appeal by taking into account the provisions|of Section 150 and Section 153 of the Act after affordingan opportunity of hearing to the parties. In the result, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/-|JUDGE. Sd/-—JUDGE