Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28036 (KAR)

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. SMT. RUCHIKA KASLIWAL

ITA/88/2026 · 2026-07-09

K Manmadha Rao, S G Pandit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34621-DB ITA No. 88 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2026 BETWEEN: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (BENAMI PROHIBITION), ROOM NO.213, 2ND FLOOR, C.R. BUILDING ANNEX, QUEEN'S ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVI RAJ Y. V., ADV.) AND: SMT. RUCHIKA KASLIWAL R/O FLAT NO.B2202, VAISHNAVU TERRACES, J.P. NAGAR, 4TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 076. …RESPONDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 49 OF THE PROHIBITION OF BENAMI PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS ACT 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, IN FPA- PBPT/ 2571/ BNG/ 2023 DATED 18.11.2025 ANNEXURE-A AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY IN R NO.561/2022 ANNEXURE-F. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34621-DB ITA No. 88 of 2026 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 DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) This Income Tax Appeal is filed under Section 49 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (for short 'Act, 1988), questioning the order dated 18.11.2025 bearing No.FPA-PBPT-2571/BNG/2023 passed by the Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA with a prayer to confirm the order of Adjudicating Authority in R.No.561/2022. 2. The Income Tax Appeal would be maintainable only under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since, the present appeal is being filed under Section 49 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, the appeal would not be maintainable. Hence, the appeal - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34621-DB ITA No. 88 of 2026 stands disposed of with a liberty to the appellant to file appropriate appeal under Section 49 of the Act, 1988. Accordingly, the office objections are sustained. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10