Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHIKHANA TRUST, MANDYA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

…terial without any supportive document and the statements are relied upon by the AO without giving opportunity of cross-examination. 193. The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party against whom such oral evidence is being used must be allowed the opportunity of examining the per…

M/S. SRI . ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHILKSHANA TRUST,MANDYA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

…e statements are relied upon by the AO without giving opportunity of cross-examination. Page 54 of 127 ITA Nos.1096 & 1207/Bang/2024 193. The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party against whom such oral evidence is being used must be allowed the opportunity of examining the per…

SRI. D. K SHIVAKUMAR ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan Kassessment Year : 2018-19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. D. K. Shivakumar, Vs. DCIT, No.252, “Kenkkeri” 18th Cross, Circle – 1(4), Upper Palace Orchards, Bangalore. Sadashivanagar, Bangalore – 560 080. PAN : AKKPS 1306 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : S/Shri. Chandrasekhar and Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue by : Shri.Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel. Date of hearing : 10.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member This is an appeal…

SMT. BRIDGET ANTHONY(LEGAL HEIR OF LATE MR. ELEVATHINGAL JOSEPH ANTHONY),BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

…the same has been drawn based on the above Smt. Bridget Anthony, Bangalore Page 21 of 28 statement. He relied on the following decisions for the above proposition. • Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (324) ELT 641 • Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd Vs ACIT 67 ITD 504 • ACIT Vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd 397 ITR 82 • Fateh Chand Charitable Trust Vs CIT (Exemptions) 49 IR (Trib) 276 • Obulapuram Mining Company Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT 2016 (7) TMI 1435 8.6 He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bangalore Tribunal in Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust ITA Nos. 500 to 506/Bang/2020 for the above proposition. The re…

MOHAMMED IBRABIM MOHIDEEN ,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2017-18, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen 11/21, Baithul Salamath B.T. Road ACIT Uppala Gate, Uppala Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasarod Mangalore Kerala 671 322 Karnataka PAN NO : AAQPI5719Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R. Date…

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2017-18, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen 11/21, Baithul Salamath B.T. Road ACIT Uppala Gate, Uppala Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasarod Mangalore Kerala 671 322 Karnataka PAN NO : AAQPI5719Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R. Date…

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2017-18, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen 11/21, Baithul Salamath B.T. Road Uppala Gate, Uppala Kasarod Kerala 671 322 PAN NO : AAQPI5719Q APPELLANT Appellant by Respondent by ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangalore Karnataka RESPONDENT Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R. Date of Hearing D…

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2017-18, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen 11/21, Baithul Salamath B.T. Road ACIT Uppala Gate, Uppala Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasarod Mangalore Kerala 671 322 Karnataka PAN NO : AAQPI5719Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R. Date…

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2017-18, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen 11/21, Baithul Salamath B.T. Road ACIT Uppala Gate, Uppala Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasarod Mangalore Kerala 671 322 Karnataka PAN NO : AAQPI5719Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R. Date…

M/S. EMIRATES HINDUSTAN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…estation from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 15.4 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the providing of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party against whom such oral evidence is being used must be allowed the opportunity of examining the per…

MKH INFRASTRUCTURE,KERALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…estation from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 15.4 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the providing of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party against whom such oral evidence is being used must be allowed the opportunity of examining the per…

INCOME TAX OFFICER W 1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…station from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 13.20 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 51 of 104 aga…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, VIJAYANAGAR vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…station from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 13.20 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 51 of 104 aga…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 HASSAN, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONGS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…station from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 13.20 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 51 of 104 aga…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY & SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…station from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 13.20 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 51 of 104 aga…

M/S. S. RAMASHANDRA SETTY & SONS,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…station from the assessee side being not having any name or seal of the assessee. Being so no credence to be given to this document. 13.20 The Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Investments Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 67 ITD 504 (Bang.) held that the provision of the copy of the statement or letters is not sufficient opportunity. Oral evidence of persons concerned with the transaction are important piece of evidence and before it could replace the written evidence, the party ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 51 of 104 aga…

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

…e assessee relies on the following decisions:  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE 2015 (10) TMI 442 - SUPREME COURT / 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (SC)  Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax [19981 67 ITD 504 (BANG.) Page 30 of 121 ITA Nos.1061 to 1066/Bang/2023 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bangalore 9.23 Therefore, mere furnishing the copy of statements recorded is not sufficient. The assessee against whom the statements are to be used should be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the person who has given statement. Reliance is placed on the…

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

…e assessee relies on the following decisions:  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE 2015 (10) TMI 442 - SUPREME COURT / 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (SC)  Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax [19981 67 ITD 504 (BANG.) Page 30 of 121 ITA Nos.1061 to 1066/Bang/2023 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bangalore 9.23 Therefore, mere furnishing the copy of statements recorded is not sufficient. The assessee against whom the statements are to be used should be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the person who has given statement. Reliance is placed on the…

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

…e assessee relies on the following decisions:  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE 2015 (10) TMI 442 - SUPREME COURT / 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (SC)  Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax [19981 67 ITD 504 (BANG.) Page 30 of 121 ITA Nos.1061 to 1066/Bang/2023 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bangalore 9.23 Therefore, mere furnishing the copy of statements recorded is not sufficient. The assessee against whom the statements are to be used should be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the person who has given statement. Reliance is placed on the…

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

…e assessee relies on the following decisions:  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE 2015 (10) TMI 442 - SUPREME COURT / 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (SC)  Kirloskar Investments & Finance Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax [19981 67 ITD 504 (BANG.) Page 30 of 121 ITA Nos.1061 to 1066/Bang/2023 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bangalore 9.23 Therefore, mere furnishing the copy of statements recorded is not sufficient. The assessee against whom the statements are to be used should be provided an opportunity to cross-examine the person who has given statement. Reliance is placed on the…