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

133A was conducted in the M/s Himalaya Promoters and Developers on 01.02.2017 which is engaged in the construction of apartments. During the course of survey proceedings, voluminous evidences were unearthed related to the unaccounted investments over and above what is shown in the books, in the construction of a hotel complex in Udupi by M/s Grand De Himalaya Hotels & Resorts

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

133A was conducted in the M/s Himalaya Promoters and Developers on 01.02.2017 which is engaged in the construction of apartments. During the course of survey proceedings, voluminous evidences were unearthed related to the unaccounted investments over and above what is shown in the books, in the construction of a hotel complex in Udupi by M/s Grand De Himalaya Hotels & Resorts

CHOKKANAHALLI GUNDAPPA CHANDRAPPA ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result both these appeals filed by the\nassessee are allowed

survey proceedings u/s 133A of\nthe Act.\n3. That the learned lower authorities of Income tax erred in law in dismissing the consideration\nof revised reply in the predetermined manner without bringing any valid materials on record.\n4. That the learned lower authorities erred in law and on facts in making an addition of\nRs.4,65,00,000/- u/s

M/S. POWER POINT,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2019-20

survey, the Assessee's case was selected for scrutiny based on the guidelines issued for compulsory selection of cases, by issuing a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act on 23/09/2020. Case was centralized to Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Bangalore vide order u/s 127 passed by Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Bangalore

TEXO THE BUILDERS ,UDUPI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, we dismiss grounds raised by the assessee

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

TDS. 1.2. The Survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the appellant on 12.12.2017. During

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

133A of the Act. Therefore, the survey conducted is part and parcel of the search proceedings and various incriminating materials were also found. There is a difference in the physical cash balance found from the actual books of accounts. This also shows that there is incriminating document found. Therefore, the AO has correctly issued notice under section 153A

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

133A of the Act. Therefore, the survey conducted is part and parcel of the search proceedings and various incriminating materials were also found. There is a difference in the physical cash balance found from the actual books of accounts. This also shows that there is incriminating document found. Therefore, the AO has correctly issued notice under section 153A

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

133A of the Act. Therefore, the survey conducted is part and parcel of the search proceedings and various incriminating materials were also found. There is a difference in the physical cash balance found from the actual books of accounts. This also shows that there is incriminating document found. Therefore, the AO has correctly issued notice under section 153A

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(1), MYSURU vs. SHRI. H OMKARAPPA (HUF), SHIVAMOGGA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2008-09 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri. H. Omkarappa, (Huf), Ward - 1, #3, A Block, Apmc Yard, Shivamogga Sagar Road, Shivamogga. Pan : Aabhh 1124 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Shri. S. Ramasubramanyam, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2022 O R D E R

133A was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on 29.09.2010. During the course of survey, certain entries in the books of account were noticed involving transactions of receipt of demand drafts and withdrawal of cash. The explanation furnished by the assessee was not satisfactory to the learned assessing officer and therefore, the same was added to the total

KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result the ITA No

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

133A of the Act was carried out in the case of M/s. Xentrix Studios Pvt. Ltd., on 03.05.2017. It was found that Shri. D. S. Nandish had floated several companies / firms / business concerns and utilized the bank accounts of these entities for depsoting unaccounted and unexplained cash, wherein the account of the appellant has also ben utilized for depositing such

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

u/s 142(1)stating that no valid return is exists If the compliance is not done, the case will be completed under section 144 of the Act. . Accordingly, the case was processed under section 144 of the Act Assessee was issued notice on 25.09.2020 udner section 142(1) of the Act to furnish the details regarding nature of business carried

MA SMART DEVELOPERS MANGALORE PVT LTD.,,MANGALORE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

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

133A of the\nAct conducted on 30.12.2015 at the business premises of M/s. Hindustan\nPromoters & Developers and on the basis of statement recorded from Shri\nMd. Ibrahim, Managing Director of assessee company and also on the basis\nof statement recorded u/s 132(4)of the Act from Shri Md. Ameer, Proprietor\nof Coastal Constructions, wherein details of cash payments made

LIFESTYLE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

u/s. 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted on the registered address of the assessee on 08.03.2018 for the purpose of verifying whether appropriate taxes have been deducted at source on the expenses incurred/payments made by the assessee. During the survey the AO observed that the assessee has taken many properties on lease and the assessee has been deducting TDS

LIFESTYLE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

u/s. 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted on the registered address of the assessee on 08.03.2018 for the purpose of verifying whether appropriate taxes have been deducted at source on the expenses incurred/payments made by the assessee. During the survey the AO observed that the assessee has taken many properties on lease and the assessee has been deducting TDS

CHIEF OFFIER,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

survey was conducted u/s. 133A of the Act on 05.03.2015 to verify the compliance of TDS ITA No.931 & 932/Bang/2024 Page

CHIEF OFFIER,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

survey was conducted u/s. 133A of the Act on 05.03.2015 to verify the compliance of TDS ITA No.931 & 932/Bang/2024 Page

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 during the course of survey

M/S. NARAYANA MINES PRIVATE LIMITED,HOSAPETE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS compliance by the assessee, a survey U/s 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted at the business premises of assessee