IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ms. Nisha Dudheria, 66, Navniketan, The Income Tax Officer, KR Road, Basavanagudi, Ward-5(2)(3), Vs.

Bangalore – 560 004. Bangalore.

PAN: BKRPD5938G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate and Assessee by :

Ms. Girija G.P., Advocate Revenue by : Shri Subramanian – JCIT DR Date of Hearing : 09-02-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 12-03-2026

ORDER

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT

1. ITA No. 316/Bang/2025 for Assessment Year 2015 – 16 is filed by Ms. Nisha Dudheria, Bangalore (the Assessee/Appellant) against the Appellate Order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (the Ld. CIT(A)) dated 04.02.2025 wherein the Appeal filed by the Assessee against the Reassessment Order passed u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Officer,Ward – 5 (2) (3), Bangalore (the Ld. Assessing Officer)was dismissed.

2. The Assessee has preferred Appeal against the Appellate Order wherein the Assessee challenges the reopening of the assessment in violation of the principles of the natural justice as well as the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 259 ITR 19. The Assessee has also challenged several aspects of the reopening of the Assessment as well as the addition on the merits of the case.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case shows that Assessee is an individual earning salary and income from business, filed return of income on 31.08.2015 atRs. 19,91,870/-. The return of income was processed u/s. 143 (1) of the Act. However, as per the information received by the Ld. Assessing Officer, that Assessee has earned the long-term capital gain in some of the companies, as per the report of the investigation wing, the case of the Assessee was reopened by issuance of notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act on 31.03.2018. The Assessee as per letter dated 20.04.2018 submitted that the return originally filed on 31.08.2015 may be treated as the return in response to a notice u/s. 148 of the act. The Assessee sought the reasons for reopening of the Assessment which was supplied to the Assessee on 08.05.2018. Subsequently, the notice u/s. 143 (2) was issued to the Assessee on 09.05.2018 and notice u/s. 142 (1) was also issued on 12.12.2018. The Assessee submitted certain details. In her letter dated 21.12.2018, Assessee submitted that the profit made by the Assessee is of Rs. 1.67 crores and not Rs. 1.34 crores as mentioned in the reasons for reopening of the Assessment. The Ld. Assessing Officer passed the Reassessment Order on 28.12.2018 determining the total income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,87,46,474/- against the returned income of Rs. 19,91,872/- making an addition of Rs. 1.67 crores u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act.

4. The Assessee aggrieved with the order of the Assessment preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the reopening of the Assessment as well as the addition on the merits of the case. The main ground of the challenge to the reopening was that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Ld. Assessing Officer violates the procedure prescribed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 259 ITR 19. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee holding that the proceedings u/s. 148 are valid and further the addition is also correctly made by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Thus, the Appeal of the Assessee was dismissed and therefore the Assessee is in appeal before us.

5. The Ld. Authorised Representative Shri KR Pradeep, Advocate and Ms. Girija GP, Advocate filed a paper book containing 198 pages. The main argument of the Ld. Authorised Representative was that the Assessee has objected to the proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act as per letter dated 21.12.2018 placed at page No. 68 – 69 of the paper book wherein the Assessee has objected to the reopening of the proceedings, the Ld. Assessing