SHRI. KANTHULA RAVISHANKAR,,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for asst

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazkanthula Ravishanker, ‘Ravshan’ No.7, Bruton Road, Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore . Respondent Appellant By : Shri A.C Raju, C.A Respondent By : Shri B.R Ramesh, Cit Date Of Hearing : 03-1-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-1-2018 O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) – 7, Bangalore Dated 30/8/2016 For Asst. Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly Stated, The Facts Of The Case Are As Under:- 2.1 The Assessee, Prop. K.K Corporation, Engaged In Business As Selling Agents For M/S Raymonal Ltd., Products For The States Of Ita No.1897/B/16 2

income of the instant year. The proportionate credit of TDS at 10% has been allowed by the A.O out of the undisclosed TDS of Rs. 5,04,063/-. The amount of this undisclosed TDS has ITA No.1897/B/16 7 never been a point of dispute. But the only contention regarding the amount is regarding the addition

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

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R.CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU @ R CHANDRU ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAPPA CHANDRU , BANGALORE

In the result, out of seven appeals of the assessee, two appeals for A

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS has been made in respect of these 6 contractors and they have filed returns of income for various years. 8.4 I find merit in the contentions of the appellant that the income earned by these 6 persons cannot be assessed in the hands of the appellant. Although the A.O has pointed out various circumstances to show that these persons

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

additional income offered by the assessee lacked a sound basis. Consequently, the AO proceeded with the assessment based on entries in the books of accounts and materials found during the search proceedings. 4.4 The AO observed that the assessee failed to properly account for contract receipts in the books of accounts while claiming full TDS

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

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

additional income declared by the assessee under section 153A of the Act completed assessment on 30.12.2018 for both the Assessment Years. 15. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) partly allowed appeal of the assessee. 16. Aggrieved from the above Order, assesseeand Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal