MAHESH S N HUF,VIJAYANAGARA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HOSAPETE

ITA 2015/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mahesh S.N. HUF, who appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The primary contention was the reduction of agricultural income assessed by the Assessing Officer (AO) from Rs.33.09 lakhs to Rs.16,77,017, with the balance amount being assessed as Income from Other Sources (IOS). The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not provide a sufficient opportunity to present his case, leading to an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s decision to be obscure and lacking a detailed examination of the assessee's submissions, thus restoring the matter for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34148 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GANESH R GALE; STANDING COUNSEL
• Assessee Lawyers: MADHUKAR HEGDE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"ITA No.2015/Bang/2024 Mahesh S.N. HUF, Vijayanagara Dist. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2015/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mahesh S.N. HUF 193/983, 6th Ward Bruce Pet Kottur Road Harapanahalli Vijayanagara Dist. Karnataka 583 131 PAN NO : AAHHM4568A Vs. ITO Ward-1 Hospete APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Madhukar Hegde, A.R. Respondent by : Sri Ganesh R Gale, Standing counsel for department Date of Hearing : 23.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06.01.2025 O R D E R PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 20.8.2024 and relates to assessment year 2020-21 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067783474(1). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an HUF having income from house property and agricultural income. The assessee filed his return of income declaring an income of Rs.6,22,730/- and has claimed deduction u/s 80TTA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). Apart from the house property income, the assessee has also earned agricultural income of R.s33.09 lakhs. The case of ITA No.2015/Bang/2024 Mahesh S.N. HUF, Vijayanagara Dist. Page 2 of 3 the assessee was selected for scrutiny to examine the genuineness of agricultural income. Thereafter, no one appeared before the AO in the assessment proceedings and accordingly the AO passed the assessment on the basis of material available with him. The ld. AO has reduced the quantum of agricultural income from Rs.33.09 lakhs to Rs.16,77,017/- and assessed the balance amount of Rs 16,32,064/- as Income from other sources(IOS). 3. Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide its order dated 20.8.2024 dismissed the appeal of the assessee without passing any speaking order in respect of the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee has come up in appeal before us and has raised around 8 grounds of appeal, out of which ground Nos.7 & 8 are general in nature, ground No.1 is with respect to violation of principles of natural justice and in ground Nos.2 to 6, the assessee has challenged the addition on merits of the case. 4. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee has argued that the ld. CIT(A) has not accorded sufficient opportunity to the assessee for presenting his case and hence, the matter may kindly be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for examining afresh. 5. Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Perusal of the order of ld. CIT(A) would show that the ld. CIT(A) after noting the arguments of the assessee from page 3 to 6 has decided the appeal in a very obscure manner. Therefore, we are of the view that in the interest of justice demand fresh adjudication at the end of the ld. CIT(A). We therefore, restore this matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding afresh in accordance ITA No.2015/Bang/2024 Mahesh S.N. HUF, Vijayanagara Dist. Page 3 of 3 with law. Needless to say that the ld. CIT(A) will grant sufficient opportunity to the assessee before taking any view. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th Jan, 2025 Sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Accountant Member Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 6th Jan’25. VG/SPS Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. "