Karnataka High Court
Buckeye Trust vs Registrar on 18 September, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:37479
WP No. 25280 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 25280 OF 2025 (T-IT)
BETWEEN:
BUCKEYE TRUST
REGISTERED UNDER
THE INDIAN TRUST ACT, 1882
PLOT NO.23, NADATHUR PLACE
3RD FLOOR, 8TH MAIN ROAD
3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 011
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
NANDAN LAXMAN SASTRY.
Digitally
signed by
NAGAVENI ...PETITIONER
Location: (BY SRI A.MAHESH CHOWDHARY.,ADVOCATE)
High Court of
Karnataka
AND:
1. REGISTRAR
HON'BLE ITAT
BENGALURU - 51
1ST CROSS ROAD
3RD BLOCK EAST
4TH T BLOCK EAST
TILAK NAGAR
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:37479
WP No. 25280 of 2025
HC-KAR
JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 041.
2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
INCOME TAX OFFICE, BMTC BUILDING
80FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK
NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE
KORMANAGALA
BENGALURU - 560 095.
3. FACELESS ASSESSMENT UNIT
ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,
JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU STADIUM,
DELHI - 110 003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRAMOD B., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI M.DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO DIRECTION
TO R1 TO DEFER THE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ANNEXURE-D
ITA/1051/24 DTD 30.12.2024 UNTIL THE DISPOSAL OF THE
PETITION PENDING BEFORE PRESIDENT HON'BLE ITAT
MUMBAI, VIDE ANNEXURE-J ITA-1051/24.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:37479
WP No. 25280 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:
"a. Issue a writ of mandamus or an appropriate direction to Respondent No.1 to defer the proceedings vide Annexure-D ITA: 1051/24 dtd:30- 12-24 until the disposal of the petition pending President before Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai, vide Annexure J ITA-1051/2024 in the interest of justice and equity.
b. Any other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard Sri A. Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Pramod B., learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri M. Dilip, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 AND 3.
3. Owing to the submissions made on 19.08.2025, this Court had passed the following order:
"Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri.K. Shashi Kiran Shetty appearing for the petitioner.
The petitioner is before this Court on a very strange circumstance. An adjudication of the rights of the petitioner takes place before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at the "A" Bench: Bangalore. The order is appended to the petition. The order prima facie indicates that it is Artificial intelligence driven. The indication is -4- NC: 2025:KHC:37479 WP No. 25280 of 2025 HC-KAR vindicated, by the subsequent order recalling the order as it was so rendered by the members of the Tribunal or before the Tribunal.
After the recall of the said order, it transpires that certain members have recused themselves as they were part of the order that was passed which is allegedly Artificial Intelligence driven. The Judicial Member who is said to be the author of the order that was recalled on an allegedly driven by Artificial Intelligence to a large extent, is now wanting to hear the matter. Learned Senior Counsel submits that, an application was filed to post the matter before any other Tribunal of the jurisdiction. The said application is pending consideration before the President. The learned Senior Counsel submits that if the concerned Judicial Member is permitted to go on and proceeding to pass orders, it would be hit by apparent bias or the concept that 'justice must not only be done but seem to have been done'.
In that light, further proceedings before the Tribunal shall remain stayed.
Learned counsel Sri.Jeevan J Neeralgi is directed to accept notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
The petitioner to serve set of papers upon the aforesaid counsel forthwith.
List on 21.08.2025 in Preliminary Hearing.
Interim order restraining the Judicial Member from hearing the matter will not come in the way of the President considering the application so filed by these petitioners seeking transfer of the proceeding to any other Tribunal."
Pursuant to the afore-quoted order, the matter is assigned to a different bench by the President of the Tribunal. With placing the matter before a different bench, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition would be -5- NC: 2025:KHC:37479 WP No. 25280 of 2025 HC-KAR disposed as having become unnecessary, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail of such remedy before the appropriate fora, if an order would be passed against him.
4. In the light of the said submission, reserving such liberty, the petition stands disposed as having become infructuous.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44