VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

ITA 1658/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member), SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K (Judicial Member)32 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were infructuous and invalid because the CIT(A)'s findings, which ran contrary to the reasons recorded for reopening, remained unchallenged by the revenue. Consequently, any additions made by the AO were deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions made by the AO. The reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 148 based on reasons recorded by the AO. The assessee contended that the reassessment was bad in law due to procedural infirmities and that the additions were not justified on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 were valid, and whether the additions made to the assessee's income were justified on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 151,Section 133A,Section 132,Section 153C,Section 68,Section 37,Section 133(6),Section 234A,Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(12)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri. Ramesh, CA
For Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Hearing: 01.05.2025Pronounced: 22.05.2025

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :

These three appeals are filed by the assessee against common order passed by the learned CIT(A), Bangalore, dated 26.06.2024, on the following grounds:

Grounds of appeal in ITA No.1656/Bang/2024

1.

The Assessment order passed u/s 148 is bad in law as the AO has not recorded the reason by himself, for reopening of assessment u/s.148 of the Act and not provided copy of reasons recorded by AO.

2.

The CIT (A) has erred in assuming that without recording of reasons, there will not be approval from PCIT. The CIT (A) has made an ITA Nos.1656 to 1658/Bang/2024 Page 2

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →