DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBBALLI vs. SHRI KRISHNA MOHAN KALBURGI, HUBBALLI

additional income of Rs.91,66,000/- in his\nindividual hands for the Assessment Year 2918-19. Further, during the course of\nsearch action under Section 132 of the Act conducted at his residence, the assessee\nin reply to question No.26 of his sworn statement recorded under Section 132(4)\nof the Act on 18.01.2019 stated that he had investment

S R CONSTRUCTIONS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Incomes offered by sub-contractors 80,92,433 TDS 13,93,000 TDS 14,94,000 Total non-cash items of 20 sub-contractors (B) 6,50,64,223 Total non-cash items of 20 sub-contractors (B) 13,16,88,058 Balance amount (A-B) 7,42,58,240 Balance amount (A-B) 7,67,70,811 Already offered

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU vs. SRI. SURESH S KANAJI, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

additional income\noffered by the assessee lacked a sound basis. Consequently, the AO\nproceeded with the assessment based on entries in the books of\naccounts and materials found during the search proceedings.\n4.4\nThe AO observed that the assessee failed to properly account for\ncontract receipts in the books of accounts while claiming full TDS

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

addition of the stipulation of “relevant assessment year” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the six year block period but not later than ten AYs'. The block period for search assessment thus came to be enlarged to stretch up to ten AYs'. The 2017 Amending Act also put in place certain prerequisite conditions which

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding, furnished or made or issued or taken or purported to have been furnished or made or issued or taken in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or shall be deemed to be invalid merely

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBBALLI vs. SHRI KRISHNA MOHAN KALBURGI, HUBBALLI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for both the\nPronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page

additional income of Rs.91,66,000/- in his\nindividual hands for the Assessment Year 2018-19. Further, during the course of\nsearch action under section 132 of the Act conducted at his residence, the assessee\nin reply to question No.26 of his sworn statement recorded under section 132(4)\nof the Act on 18.01.2019 stated that he had investment

MR. SALEEM THANGAL KADER PALKAD,UDUPI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDUPI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Additional income offered during search 60,25,529 57,90,252 144,74,128 Income shown in return u/s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 - Income assessed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 165,36,001 Tax payable in 153C return after TDS

MR. SALEEM THANGAL KADER PLAKAD,INDIVIDUAL,UDUPI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Additional income offered during search 60,25,529 57,90,252 144,74,128 Income shown in return u/s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 - Income assessed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 165,36,001 Tax payable in 153C return after TDS

MR. SALEEM THANGAL KADER PLAKAD,INDIVIDUAL,UDUPI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Additional income offered during search 60,25,529 57,90,252 144,74,128 Income shown in return u/s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 - Income assessed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C 80,81,368 71,66,081 165,36,001 Tax payable in 153C return after TDS

EXPAT ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

TDS deducted and reflect in form No.26AS. Accordingly, this issue is remitted to the file of ld. AO for fresh consideration to carry out necessary enquiry on this regard. Additional grounds: 11. Ground Nos.1, 1(i), 1(ii), 1(iii) & 1(iv) are with regard to addition of Rs.1.42 crores which is admitted as income

HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Hp India Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As The Joint Hewlett-Packard India Commissioner Sales Pvt. Ltd.), Of Income Tax, 24, Salarpuria Arena, Ltu, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore. Vs. Adugodi, Bangalore – 560 030. Pan: Aaacc9862F Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2009-10 (By Revenue) : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Saravanan B, Cit-Dr

Addition of deferred revenue 346,02,21,726 Undisclosed income detected from TDS 3 279,40,71,311 certificates Addition

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S HEWLETT - PACKARD INDIA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Hp India Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As The Joint Hewlett-Packard India Commissioner Sales Pvt. Ltd.), Of Income Tax, 24, Salarpuria Arena, Ltu, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore. Vs. Adugodi, Bangalore – 560 030. Pan: Aaacc9862F Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2009-10 (By Revenue) : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Saravanan B, Cit-Dr

Addition of deferred revenue 346,02,21,726 Undisclosed income detected from TDS 3 279,40,71,311 certificates Addition