NAGANNA L/R FOR LATE RANGEGOWDA ,HASSAN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

ITA 267/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the legal representative of Rangegowda, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the alleged violation of natural justice and legal principles in the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 2011-12. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's representation during the initial proceedings and decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to present his case and documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784057 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUBRAMANIAN
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMAN LUNKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reopening of assessment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"ITA No.267/Bang/2025 Rangegowda (Deceased) LR Naganna, Hassan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.267/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Rangegowda (Deceased) LR Naganna H.No.56, Rangegowda Building Paduvalehippe Holenarasipur Hassan 573 211 Karnataka PAN NO : BPGPR2721M Vs. ITO Ward-1 Hassan APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.R. Respondent by : Sri Subramanian, D.R. Date of Hearing : 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2025 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The legal representative of the assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 16/12/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing officer. The appellate order as passed being bad in law and in gross violation of principles of natural justice is liable to be quashed. 2. In any case, the orders having been passed in total violation of principles of law, against the principles of natural justice Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.267/Bang/2025 Rangegowda (Deceased) LR Naganna, Hassan Page 2 of 4 and in a biased/non-judicious way is bad in law and is to be quashed. 3.1 The ld. CIT(A) has also erred in confirming the reopening of assessment by ld. AO. The conditions precedent for issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 having not been satisfied, the reopening of assessment was bad in law and hence the ld. CIT(A) should have instead of confirming the assessment order, quashed the reopening of assessment. 3.2 In any case, the passing of the order without complying with the legal and statutory requirements of reassessment proceeding also makes the order bad in law and such order is liable to be quashed. 4. In any case and without prejudice, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the determination of some amount by Assessing Officer as taxable income in the hands of nonexistent entity and consequential tax calculation and levy of interest. These being not in accordance with law and against the facts of the case are to be totally rejected. 5. In any case and without further prejudice the computation of income has no basis and is to be ignored in total. 6. In view of the above and on other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing the impugned order may be quashed or atleast the assessment of income as done be deleted and interest levied be also deleted. 3. It is evident from the record that the learned CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex parte due to the non-appearance of/on behalf of the assessee. We further find that even during the assessment proceedings, the assessee could not produce the documents as sought by the Assessing Officer (“AO”) and therefore the assessment was completed on the best judgment basis under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act on the basis of the material available on record. We find that no details were also submitted before the learned CIT(A), and the additions made by the AO were affirmed vide impugned order. In the present appeal before us, the assessee is duly Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.267/Bang/2025 Rangegowda (Deceased) LR Naganna, Hassan Page 3 of 4 represented by the learned Authorised Representative and wishes to pursue the litigation against the addition made by the AO. 4. In the facts and circumstances as noted above, we are of the considered view that, in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to represent his case on merits and produce all the documents in support of his claim. Since in the present case, the assessee neither appeared before the AO nor before the learned CIT(A), we deem it fit and proper to restore the matter to the file of the jurisdictional AO for de novo adjudication on merits after considering all the details/submissions as may be filed by the assessee and after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to raise all the contentions in support of its claim. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the assessment proceedings and furnish all the details as may be sought by the AO for complete adjudication. As the matter is being restored to the jurisdictional AO for adjudication on merits, the other grievance raised by the assessee in the present appeal does not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14th Nov, 2025 Sd/- (Prashant Maharishi) Vice President Sd/- (Sandeep Singh Karhail) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 14th Nov, 2025. VG/SPS Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.267/Bang/2025 Rangegowda (Deceased) LR Naganna, Hassan Page 4 of 4 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. Printed from counselvise.com "