M/S. HINDUSTHAN BAWA BUILDERS,MANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

132(4) at the residential premises, had stated that the handwriting in the `ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore Page 5 of 27 seized materials of Mr. Abdul Nasir, the Manager of the assessee firm, who was the brother-in law of Mr. Kodi Abdul Khader. Mr. Abdul Nasar, in the sworn statement recorded

M/S. HINDUSTHAN BAWA BUILDERS,MANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

132(4) at the residential premises, had stated that the handwriting in the `ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore Page 5 of 27 seized materials of Mr. Abdul Nasir, the Manager of the assessee firm, who was the brother-in law of Mr. Kodi Abdul Khader. Mr. Abdul Nasar, in the sworn statement recorded

M/S. HINDUSTHAN BAWA BUILDERS,MANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

132(4) at the residential premises, had stated that the handwriting in the `ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore Page 5 of 27 seized materials of Mr. Abdul Nasir, the Manager of the assessee firm, who was the brother-in law of Mr. Kodi Abdul Khader. Mr. Abdul Nasar, in the sworn statement recorded

M/S. HINDUSTHAN BAWA BUILDERS,MANGALORE 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 Prakash Chand Yadav

132(4) at the residential premises, had stated that the handwriting in the `ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore Page 5 of 27 seized materials of Mr. Abdul Nasir, the Manager of the assessee firm, who was the brother-in law of Mr. Kodi Abdul Khader. Mr. Abdul Nasar, in the sworn statement recorded

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 115BBE of Income tax Act. He submitted that there is no case for addition of the said amount u/s 68 of the Act and he prayed that the same may be deleted. 13.3. The ld. D.R. submitted that no explanation whatsoever was given other than filing the list of cheques credited to his various bank accounts. The assessee

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 115BBE of Income tax Act. He submitted that there is no case for addition of the said amount u/s 68 of the Act and he prayed that the same may be deleted. 13.3. The ld. D.R. submitted that no explanation whatsoever was given other than filing the list of cheques credited to his various bank accounts. The assessee

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

132(4)/131 of the Act is self-speaking document and it cannot be overruled. In our opinion, reliability of these statements depends upon the facts of each case and particularly surrounding circumstances and in this case, the lower authorities ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala Page 49 of 62 reached to the conclusion

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

132(4)/131 of the Act is self-speaking document and it cannot be overruled. In our opinion, reliability of these statements depends upon the facts of each case and particularly surrounding circumstances and in this case, the lower authorities ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala Page 49 of 62 reached to the conclusion

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

132(4)/131 of the Act is self-speaking document and it cannot be overruled. In our opinion, reliability of these statements depends upon the facts of each case and particularly surrounding circumstances and in this case, the lower authorities ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala Page 49 of 62 reached to the conclusion

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

132(4)/131 of the Act is self-speaking document and it cannot be overruled. In our opinion, reliability of these statements depends upon the facts of each case and particularly surrounding circumstances and in this case, the lower authorities ITA Nos.463 to 466, 485 & 486/Bang/2024 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kasargod, Kerala Page 49 of 62 reached to the conclusion

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

132(4) of\nthe Act on 18.01.2019 and 19.01.2015 and confirmed having given cash loan of\nRs.5 Crores to Mishra Group by him on behalf of M/s. Kalburgi Projects and\nfurther stated that no interest has been paid on the cash loan of Rs.5 Crores.\nFurther, during the course of post search verification of the seized documents by\nthe investigating

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

Section 153A. Of equal significance is the introduction of the concept of abatement of all pending assessments as a consequence of which curtains come down on regular assessments.ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore ITA No.844/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment

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

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return of income, assessment