SRI R ANUP vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/5741/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01012972202627 February 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition as not calling for adjudication. Taking note of the order passed on 31.07.2020 by the ITAT in M.P.No.369/Bang/2018, the Court kept open the legal grounds and contentions regarding that order to be raised in appropriate proceedings. The Court explicitly stated that all contentions of the petitioner were kept open. Therefore, no specific finding was made on the merits of the grounds 5 to 7 of the original ITAT appeal, nor was any direction issued to the AO. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition as not requiring adjudication, preserving the petitioner's right to pursue other remedies.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri. R. Anup, legal heir of Raja Reddy (HUF), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petition sought a direction to the Assessing Officer (AO) to consider issues raised in grounds 5 to 7 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 147/Bang/2016 for Assessment Year 2009-10. The ITAT's order in this appeal was dated 12.09.2018. During the hearing, the revenue's counsel produced an order passed in M.P.No.369/Bang/2018 dated 31.07.2020. The petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner was unaware of this order and it had not been communicated. Other proceedings had proceeded on the assumption that the miscellaneous petition was not disposed of.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction to the AO to consider issues raised in grounds 5 to 7 before the ITAT, given the existence of a subsequent order in a miscellaneous petition before the ITAT. The petitioner argued that they were unaware of the order in M.P.No.369/Bang/2018 dated 31.07.2020 and that it had not been communicated. They further contended that other proceedings had progressed on the premise that this miscellaneous petition was not disposed of. The revenue, through their counsel, produced the order in M.P.No.369/Bang/2018 dated 31.07.2020, implying its relevance to the present writ petition.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH,

Heard together (2 matters)

WP No. 5741 of 2026

ITA NO.147/BANG/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12164 WP No. 5741 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 5741 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI. R. ANUP, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, LEGAL HEIR OF RAJA REDDY (HUF), 641, I 'D' MAIN, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 071. PAN: AAFHR9408G, MOB. NO.: 87929 42387 EMAIL: smnadiger28@gmail.com …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRATIBHA VASANTRAO RAJESHWARKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1), PRESENT ADDRESS - ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 6TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. 2. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH, NO.51, 1ST CROSS, 4TH 'T' BLOCK EAST, TILAK NAGAR, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12164 WP No. 5741 of 2026

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE AO TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE GROUND NO.5 TO 7 AS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ITAT. ORDER DATED 12.09.2018 IN ITA NO.147/BANG/2016 FOR AY 2009- 10 (ANNEXURE- C) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel Sri. Y.V. Raviraj files a memo and produces the order passed in M.P.No.369/Bang/2018 dated 31.07.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware of passing of this order and have not been communicated of the same. It is further submitted that other proceedings have progressed on the premise that the miscellaneous petition was not disposed of. 3. However, taking note of the limited prayer, the present petition is disposed of as not calling for

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12164 WP No. 5741 of 2026 adjudication. Taking note of the order passed on 31.07.2020 by the tribunal, the legal grounds and contentions regarding the said order are kept open to be raised in appropriate proceedings. All contentions of the petitioner are kept open. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. SD/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →