THIMMARAYAPPA CHIKKARAMAIAH (REORESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR R T MANJUNATH),BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2867/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 April 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal decided to remit the entire issue to the AO for a fresh decision, considering the additional evidence and allowing the legal heir an opportunity to be heard. The AO was directed to obtain the death certificate and identify legal heirs.

What were the facts?

The assessee's legal heir filed an appeal after the assessee's death, stating the assessee could not represent the case before lower authorities. Additional evidence was submitted to the tribunal that was not presented earlier.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present their case and whether additional evidence should be considered. The AO's addition of capital gains without allowing cost of acquisition and expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, A.R
Hearing: 23.02.2026Pronounced: 30.04.2026

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal at the instance of the legal heir of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 07.10.2025 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081499384(1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) for the assessment year 2015-16.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

ITA No.2867/Bang/2025 ThimmarayappaChikkaramaiah, Bengaluru Page 2 of 4

3.

Before us, both the parties fairly conceded that the assessee could not represent his case before both the Authorities below. Further, the ld. AR of the assessee also submitted that the assessee has already expired and for this reason the son & legal heir of the assessee Sri R T Manjunath has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal and accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted before the AO to substantiate the claim as also requested before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Further, the ld. AR of the assessee

ITA No.2867/Bang/2025 ThimmarayappaChikkaramaiah, Bengaluru Page 3 of 4 vehemently submitted that the assessee has also filed the additional evidences before this Tribunal which could not be produced before the Authorities below and accordingly prayed to accept the same in the interest of justice & fair play.

3.1 On going through the Orders of the Authorities below, we observed that the addition was made under the head “Capital Gains” by adopting the sales consideration received amounting to Rs.36,75,000/- as long term capital gain without allowing any cost of Acquisition, Cost of Improvement & Expenses for Transfer. The assessee, however while filing his return of Income in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act had declared Long term Capital Gain of Rs.21,67,695/- which was not accepted by the Authorities below in the absence of any evidences/information/submission. Before us, the assessee has filed the additional evidences like copy of sale deed and copy of guidance value notification issued by the department of stamps and Registration, Government of Karnataka which in our opinion were not provided before the Authorities below to scrutinize.

3.2 This being so, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play and as requested by the AR of the assessee, we deem it fit and proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of AO to decide a fresh in accordance with law after taking into consideration the additional evidences filed before us as well as any other evidences as may be required by the AO for the proper adjudication of the case. Further, we also direct the AO to obtain the death certificate of the assessee & also take on record the details of legal heirs/legal representatives of the deceased assessee & accordingly serve notice for hearing to the legal heir(s) in accordance with law. We make it clear that the legal representative of the deceased shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be an assessee. Needless to say, a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the

ITA No.2867/Bang/2025 ThimmarayappaChikkaramaiah, Bengaluru Page 4 of 4 legal representative(s) of the assessee. We also make it clear that in case of further default, the legal representative(s) shall not be entitled for any leniency. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30th Apr, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) (Keshav Dubey) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Bangalore, Dated 30th Apr, 2026. 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.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →