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), BAENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA), 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

In the result ITA no.1096/bang/2024 filed by assessee is partly\nallowed and ITA No

270. The assessee was denied the benefit of section 11\nof the Act.\n13. In the first round of appeal before the CIT(A), certain reliefs were\ngiven to the Appellant vide order dated 06.07.2018 in Appeal No.\n343 to 348 / DCIT CC-2(4)/CIT(A)-11/2015-16. On appeal by the\nRevenue before ITAT (in ITAs

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

In the result ITA no.1096/bang/2024 filed by assessee is partly\nallowed and ITA No

270. The assessee was denied the benefit of section 11\nof the Act.\n13. In the first round of appeal before the CIT(A), certain reliefs were\ngiven to the Appellant vide order dated 06.07.2018 in Appeal No.\n343 to 348 / DCIT CC-2(4)/CIT(A)-11/2015-16. On appeal by the\nRevenue before ITAT (in ITAs

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

INDEPENDENT AND PUBLIC SPIRITED MEDIA FOUNDATION ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : Na

270 [ PUNE] wherein it is held that when the case was transferred from Mumbai to Pune but PAN of the assessee was still lying with the ITO Mumbai , is held to be unjustified. 19. He further stated that CIT Central could not have jurisdiction to cancel the registration already granted to the assessee. He placed reliance on PACIFIC ACADEMY

MAHENDRA KUMAR ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, BENGALURU

In the result, the revisionary order passed u/s

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

270 because of the textile business sales reported by assessee at RS.10,14,56,884. As per information available the assessee was engaged in fabrics trading in the name of Hilife Style and almost 50% of the sale was in cash which were not accounted for in the books of account. During