LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3) , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

bogus purchases u/s. 69C of the Act for AY 2018–19. 16. Consequently, the assessment order was passed under section 153C r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 153D of the Act on 30/3/2022 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 91,270

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3) , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

bogus purchases u/s. 69C of the Act for AY 2018–19. 16. Consequently, the assessment order was passed under section 153C r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 153D of the Act on 30/3/2022 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 91,270

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD (LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

purchases are required\nto be added to the total income of the assessee under section 69C of\nthe Act. Accordingly, he made an addition of ₹ 43,815,000 as bogus\npurchases u/s.69C of the Act for AY 2018–19.\n16.\nConsequently, the assessment order was passed under section 153C\nr.w.s.144 r.w.s.153D of the Act on 30/3/2022 determining the total\nincome

M/S. SRI . ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHILKSHANA TRUST,MANDYA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

270. The assessee was denied the benefit of section 11 of the Act. 13. In the first round of appeal before the CIT(A), certain reliefs were given to the Appellant vide order dated 06.07.2018 in Appeal No. 343 to 348 / DCIT CC-2(4)/CIT(A)-11/2015-16. On appeal by the Revenue before ITAT (in ITAs

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHIKHANA TRUST, MANDYA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

270. The assessee was denied the benefit of section 11 of the Act. 13. In the first round of appeal before the CIT(A), certain reliefs were given to the Appellant vide order dated 06.07.2018 in Appeal No. 343 to 348 / DCIT CC-2(4)/CIT(A)-11/2015-16. On appeal by the Revenue before ITAT (in ITAs

M/S. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: Na

purchase of raw materials which explained his large drawings of cash from the bank. Learned counsel then cited a host of decisions to bring home the point that no evidence or document can be relied upon unless it is shown to the assessee. Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT. Similarly, the requirement of cross-examination as the requirement of the rules

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. S S INDUSTRIES, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the CO by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2013-14

bogus and brought it to tax u/s. 68 of the Act. 6. The CIT(Appeals) called for a remand report from the AO and the assessee also filed a rejoinder to the same. The AO had made an addition of Rs.3,71,29,294 u/s. 68 of the Act as under:- Sl. Amount added Name of the Party

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. AURA JEWELS, BANGALORE

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years : 2017-18

purchase, sale, opening and closing stock (quantity wise and value wise) has been accepted by the department year after year and in some years under scrutiny proceedings, therefore, non existence of stock of business cannot be upheld; secondly, the sale of stock in the earlier years and the sale of balance left out stock in subsequent years has been accepted

M/S. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

bogus expenses, as assessee is bound by KERC rates. It was noted by him that this is one of the issues on the side of the liability. And there may be many such issues. As assessee failed to provide all the details, the learned that AO presumed that some expenses are ceased to exist for the year under consideration

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), BANGALORE, BMTC BUILDING, KORAMANGALA, BAQNGALORE vs. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED , BESCOM CORPORATE OFFICE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

bogus expenses, as assessee is bound by KERC rates. It was noted by him that this is one of the issues on the side of the liability. And there may be many such issues. As assessee failed to provide all the details, the learned that AO presumed that some expenses are ceased to exist for the year under consideration

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

270,00,000 2016-17 397,15,833 200,00,000 TOTAL 5997,30,561 2115,01,387 1164,00,000 1670,90,000 84. Based on the above analysis, the AO has made assessments in the case of the above mentioned trustees under section 153C of the Act on protective basis. From the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 passed under

M/S PUKHRAJ HASMUKHLAL ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavassessment Year : 2014-15

270/- as against Rs.15,08,818/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.34,28,455/- as unexplained income under the facts and circumstances of the case. Page 2 of 5 4. The authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that all the transactions