CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd.

136 DTR 65High Court#8271 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also reported as

348 ITR 346

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234BSection 234DSection 244ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 153cofenduring benefitnon-application of mindchange of opinionsection 149documents seizedsatisfaction notesection 132aregular assessmentrevenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 151

Judgments citing CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd.

RAMAMURTHY PRAVEEN CHANDRA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 622/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…nsequently the proceedings initiated is not in accordance with law. In support of his arguments he relied on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd., reported in ITA Nos.619 to 622/Bang/2025 Page 20 of 26 348 ITR 346. He further relied on the judgment of Arihant Aluminium Corporation Vs. ACIT in ITA No.447/2010 (Karnataka High Court), CIT Vs. Mechmen,380 ITR 573 [MP]; CIT Vs. RRJ Securities, 380 ITR 612 [Del]. 11. He further submitted that even though the AO of the searched person and the other searched person is one and the same the provision has to be foll…

RAMAMURTHY PRAVEEN CHANDRA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 621/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…nsequently the proceedings initiated is not in accordance with law. In support of his arguments he relied on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd., reported in ITA Nos.619 to 622/Bang/2025 Page 20 of 26 348 ITR 346. He further relied on the judgment of Arihant Aluminium Corporation Vs. ACIT in ITA No.447/2010 (Karnataka High Court), CIT Vs. Mechmen,380 ITR 573 [MP]; CIT Vs. RRJ Securities, 380 ITR 612 [Del]. 11. He further submitted that even though the AO of the searched person and the other searched person is one and the same the provision has to be foll…

RAMAMURTHY PRAVEEN CHANDRA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 620/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…nsequently the proceedings initiated is not in accordance with law. In support of his arguments he relied on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd., reported in ITA Nos.619 to 622/Bang/2025 Page 20 of 26 348 ITR 346. He further relied on the judgment of Arihant Aluminium Corporation Vs. ACIT in ITA No.447/2010 (Karnataka High Court), CIT Vs. Mechmen,380 ITR 573 [MP]; CIT Vs. RRJ Securities, 380 ITR 612 [Del]. 11. He further submitted that even though the AO of the searched person and the other searched person is one and the same the provision has to be foll…

RAMAMURTHY PRAVEEN CHANDRA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 619/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…nsequently the proceedings initiated is not in accordance with law. In support of his arguments he relied on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd., reported in ITA Nos.619 to 622/Bang/2025 Page 20 of 26 348 ITR 346. He further relied on the judgment of Arihant Aluminium Corporation Vs. ACIT in ITA No.447/2010 (Karnataka High Court), CIT Vs. Mechmen,380 ITR 573 [MP]; CIT Vs. RRJ Securities, 380 ITR 612 [Del]. 11. He further submitted that even though the AO of the searched person and the other searched person is one and the same the provision has to be foll…

ATEPL RAHEE JOINT VENTURE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1570/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 1Section 2Section 271Section 271ASection 92CSection 92D

…there was an inadvertent mistake has been rejected. In our consideration opinion, there is no reason as to why the plea of inadvertent mistake should be rejected on the touchstone of Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt.Ltd vs C.I.T 348 ITR 346, wherein, it was explained that there should not be any penalty on account of human error. Furthermore, without any loss of Revenue, it is strange that penalty has been levied. In this connection, the case laws referred by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee are germane and support the case of the assessee. In this view of the matter, the penalty…

SMT.VIDYA DEVI LADHANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 118/BANG/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT (DR) (ITAT)-1, Bengaluru
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…during the course of search, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of deemed dividend is against the law and not sustainable. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions : i. CIT Vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. 136 DTR 65(Kar) ii. CIT Vs. Lancy Constructions 237 Taxmann 728 iii. Order dt.31.8.2016 in ITA No.1215/Mum/ in the case of Anil Mahavir Gupta Vs. ACIT. iv. CIT Vs. Suraj Dev Dada 367 ITR 78 (P&H) v. Pradeep Kumar Malhotra Vs. CIT 338 ITR 538 (Cal) vi. CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) Placing reliance on the above judgments, the learned Counsel for t…

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. MRS. SHAHANAZ MOHIUDDIN, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 1118/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MRS. SHAHANAZ MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 1088/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 167/BANG/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 166/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 165/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 164/BANG/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 163/BANG/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…

MR. A. MOHIUDDIN,,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA

ITA 1223/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…additions was found during the course of search, therefore the additions are not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park reported in 136 DTR 65 and CIT v. Lancy Constructions Ltd. (237 Taxman 728). 18. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the assessment for the AY 2003-04 was completed, therefore on the basis of search, the other issues with regard to which incriminating material was not seized during the course of search cannot be examined. ITA Nos.1223/B/10, 163 to…