SRI. NARAYANRAO V KULKARNI vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5619-DB ITA No. 200006 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.200006 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SRI. NARAYANRAO V. KULKARNI, #B-15, ‘PANDHARI’, VIVEKNAGAR EAST, BIJAPUR-586 109.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. MALHARA RAO, AAG A/W SRI. A. SHANKAR, ADVOCATES)

AND: THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIJAPUR RANGE, MANGALWEDHE BUILDING, OPP: BOLGUMBAZ STATION ROAD, RAILWAY STATION, BIJAPUR-586 104.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TIRUMALESH M., ADVOCATE)

THIS ITA IS FILED U/S. 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO A) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT. B) TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS THEREIN TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, "B" BENCH, BENGALURU IN MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.237/BANG/2017 DATED-27.11.2017 (IN ITA

Digitally signed by LUCYGRACE Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5619-DB ITA No. 200006 of 2018

NO.1236/BANG/2013) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 (VIDE ANNEXURE-A).

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5619-DB ITA No. 200006 of 2018

requires the ITAT to entertain the miscellaneous petition filed by the Assessee. It was the Assessee's case that, the learned ITAT had not considered the decision in the case of Shri. Shankar S. Koliwad Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Hubli, in I.T.A. No.5040/2009 dated 06.01.2012, which he has cited in support of his ground No.5 urged for asailing the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. 3. The learned ITAT did not accept the contention that the Assessee has established the said decision was relied upon or referred to during the course of hearing. The learned ITAT did not accept that specific attention of the learned ITAT was drawn to the said decision. Thus, the learned ITAT had concluded that, there was no mistake apparent from the record. 4. We have some reservation as to whether an appeal would lie under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the order of learned ITAT, rejecting the miscellaneous application since that may not constitute an order passed by the learned ITAT in the appeal. However, it is not necessary to examine this

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5619-DB ITA No. 200006 of 2018

question as, ex-facie, there is no mistake apparent on the face of the record. 5. More importantly, the Assessee has preferred a separate appeal [ITA No.200002/2017] urging all grounds to assail the order passed by the learned ITAT including as to the merits of the questions raised. 6. Thus, in any view no substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 CT: AK