- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 230 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SARITA DUDHERIA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, W/O LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA, 66, NAVNIKETAN, K.R.ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE 560 004. …APPELLANT (BY SRI DAN D'SILVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2), No.1, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI SUSHAL TIWARI, STANDING COUNSEL) THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 15.03.2022 PASSED IN ITA No.381/BANG/2020 AND ITA ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTION OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 COURT AS DEEMED FIT, SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH, BANGALORE DATED 15.03.2022 IN ITA No.381/BANG/2020 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The present appeal by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Bangalore (for short “Tribunal”) in ITA Nos.380 to 382/Bang/2020 for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 dated 15.03.2022. 2. The assessee filed return of income for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). The said assessment came to be challenged by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The CIT(A) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 disposed of the appeal on 06.02.2020. Challenging the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by order dated 15.03.2022 directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the case of the assessee in the light of the observations made therein. The Assessing Officer in compliance of the directions of the Tribunal, completed Remand Assessment Proceedings on 01.03.2024. 3. The assessee after the order of assessment pursuant to the order of the Tribunal has presented this appeal with delay of 734 days. 4. Learned counsel Sri.Dan D’Silva, for the appellant-assessee submits that the assessee participated in the Remand Assessment Proceedings expecting that the Assessing Officer would grant an opportunity for cross- examination, but it was denied. Hence, the appellant is constrained to challenge the order of the Tribunal. Learned counsel further submits that certain observations - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 made in the order of the Tribunal would come in the way of the assessee’s contention even if the Remand Assessment order is challenged. Insofar as delay, learned counsel submits that due to participation in the Remand Assessment Proceedings, expecting permission for cross- examination, the order of Tribunal was not challenged. However, when an opportunity for cross-examination was denied, the present appeal was preferred. 5. Per contra, Sri.Sushal Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Revenue submits that, pursuant to the order of remand by the Tribunal, the assessment is completed on 01.03.2024. It is submitted that the order dated 01.03.2024 is appealable before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It is further submitted that, after the assessee participating in the Remand Assessment Proceedings and suffering an order, she is not entitled to challenge the order of remand. He further submits that any grievance arising out of the Remand Assessment order, it will be open for the assessee - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 to agitate the same before the competent appellate authority. 6. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the appeal papers. 7. The return of income filed by the assessee resulted in the order of assessment dated 30.12.2016 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee availed appeal remedy before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) wherein the appeal came to be dismissed by order dated 06.02.2020. The further appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal resulted in remand to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the case of the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee has participated in the Remand Assessment Proceedings and the Assessing Officer has passed fresh assessment order on 01.03.2024. The assessee preferred this appeal after the order of Tribunal was given effect to, by the Assessing Officer by passing fresh assessment order. Having participated in the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 Remand Assessment Proceedings, it is not open for the assessee to challenge the order of remand after inordinate delay of 734 days. The contention of the assessee that the assessee was expecting permission for cross- examination is unfounded. In the order of remand by the Tribunal, it is categorically held that the assessee is not entitled for cross-examination. Inspite of the above finding, the assessee has chosen to participate in the Remand Assessment Proceedings without further challenge. At this stage, when the assessee has suffered the assessment order pursuant to the order of remand, it is not open for the assessee to challenge the order of remand. 8. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, we find no ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. For the same reasons, the explanation offered for condonation of delay is also not acceptable. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35639-DB ITA No. 230 of 2024 9. The contentions of the appellant, if any, as available in law, are left open to be adjudicated if the assessee chooses to prefer an appeal against the order of assessment dated 01.03.2024. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9