SRI H S ABDUL HAFEEZ SAYEED vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, - 3 -

- 1 -

ITA.788/2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 788 OF 2018

BETWEEN: SRI H S ABDUL HAFEEZ SAYEED AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS PROP: M/S ORIENTAL GRANITES NO.6410, A1-HABEEB SHANKAR MUTT ROAD HASSAN. …APPELLANT (BY SRI BALRAM R.RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GENERAL CIRCLER-1(2) BANGALORE-560 001 AT PRESENT WARD-3(2)(4) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT. ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, STANDING COUNSEL)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 13.01.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.42/BANG/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AS STATED ABOVE AND ETC,.

Digitally signed by MALA K N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

ITA.788/2018

THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal by the assessee is directed against common order dated January 13, 2017 insofar as it relates to ITA No.42/Bang/2014 passed by the ITAT1. 2. Appeal has been admitted to consider the following question of law:

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, was the Tribunal right in not considering the ground No.7 which related to Rs.11,00,000/- given to M/s.H.G.Narayan Associates?"

Sri.Balram Rao, learned Advocate for the assessee submitted that ITAT did not consider ground No.7 raised before the ITAT. Therefore, assessee filed a miscellaneous petition No.179/Bang/2017 and the same has been dismissed vide order dated October 25, 2017 on the

1 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

- 3 -

ITA.788/2018

ground that miscellaneous petition was filed belatedly. He prayed that this court may consider remitting the matter to ITAT to consider ground No.7.

Sri.E.I.Sanmathi, learned standing counsel for Revenue in his usual fairness did not dispute the submission of Sri.Balram Rao that ground No.7 has not been considered by ITAT.

We have perused the impugned order. Ground No.7 is extracted in para-10 of the ITAT's order.

In view of the submission of Sri.Sanmathi that ground No.7 has not been considered by ITAT, this appeal merits consideration. Hence the following; ORDER

(a) Appeal is allowed and matter is remitted to ITAT to consider ground No.7 after granting opportunity to the assessee and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law;

- 4 -

ITA.788/2018

(b) Question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

No costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

KNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

SRI H S ABDUL HAFEEZ SAYEED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER