M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

132(4) of the Act? ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 115 10.6 We place reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Courtin the case of Pullangode Rubber Product Co. Vs. State of Kerala (91 ITR 18) (SC), wherein it was held that the admission may be an important piece

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

132(4) of the Act? ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 115 10.6 We place reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Courtin the case of Pullangode Rubber Product Co. Vs. State of Kerala (91 ITR 18) (SC), wherein it was held that the admission may be an important piece

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

132(4) of the Act? ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 115 10.6 We place reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Courtin the case of Pullangode Rubber Product Co. Vs. State of Kerala (91 ITR 18) (SC), wherein it was held that the admission may be an important piece

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

SRI. H. NAGARAJA,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 263 proposing to set aside the assessment order, as the AO failed to examine the following issues: ITA Nos.613 & 614/Bang/2014 Page 4 of 41 In response to show cause notice, the assessee submitted that the issue sough to be revised by the CIT was duly examined and considered by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. After considering

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 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

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

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

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 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