SKYLINE CONSTRUCTION & HOUSING PVT. LTD.,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee's counsel moved an application for withdrawal of the appeals. The revenue did not object to this withdrawal.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(Appeals) for assessment years 2004-05 to 2006-07. The grounds of appeal raised various issues including the validity of search proceedings, additions made, and claims for deduction.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the assessee's challenge to the assessment proceedings and various additions. However, the appeal was withdrawn by the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 132,Section 80IB(10),Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member
These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the order of CIT(Appeals) inter alia on the common grounds. The grounds of appeal in is extracted hereunder for the sake of reference:-
“1. That the orders of the authorities below in so far as it is against the assessee is against the law, facts, circumstances, natural justice, equity, without jurisdiction, bad in law and all other known principles of law.
2. That the total income computed and the total tax computed is hereby disputed.
The search purportedly U/s 132 and all proceedings connected therewith and subsequent to, is against the law and requires to be vacated as such.
The additions made in the assessment cannot be termed as undisclosed income and hence requires to be vacated as such.
The notice and order of assessment is bad in law and is also barred by limitation.
The Learned Authorities below erred in not considering the claim for deduction u/s 80IB(10) for City Tower Block amounting to Rs. 87,86,466/-.
The Learned Authorities below erred in not allowing the entire deduction as claimed u/s 80IB(10) of the Act.
The appellant denies the liabilities for interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest. Further prays that the interest should be levied only on returned income.
Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority the appellant begs for consequential relief in the levy of interest V/s 234A, 234B and 234C.
For the above and other grounds and reasons which may be submitted during the course of hearing of this appeal, the assessee requests that the appeal be allowed as prayed and justice be rendered.”
During the course of hearing of appeal, the ld. counsel for the assessee has moved an application for withdrawal of the appeals, to which the revenue has no objection. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn.
Pronounced in the open court on this 4th day of November, 2016.
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026