THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

147 17.03.2022 16.04.2022 06.01.2023 265 2014-15 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 06.10.2023 351 271(1)(b) Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 01.10.2023 346 271(1)(c) 3.2 He submitted that the assessee has filed condonation petition for quantum proceedings upon receiving deficiency letter and no ITA Nos.699 to 704/Bang/2024 The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association, Bangalore Page

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

147 17.03.2022 16.04.2022 06.01.2023 265 2014-15 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 06.10.2023 351 271(1)(b) Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 01.10.2023 346 271(1)(c) 3.2 He submitted that the assessee has filed condonation petition for quantum proceedings upon receiving deficiency letter and no ITA Nos.699 to 704/Bang/2024 The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association, Bangalore Page

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

147 17.03.2022 16.04.2022 06.01.2023 265 2014-15 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 06.10.2023 351 271(1)(b) Penalty u/s 20.09.2022 20.10.2022 01.10.2023 346 271(1)(c) 3.2 He submitted that the assessee has filed condonation petition for quantum proceedings upon receiving deficiency letter and no ITA Nos.699 to 704/Bang/2024 The Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association, Bangalore Page

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

condonation of delay should not excuse negligence or lack of bona fides.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "271(1)(b)", "271(1)(c)", "249(3)", "253(5)" ], "issues

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "271(1)(b)", "271(1)(c)", "249(3)", "253(5)" ], "issues": "Whether the assessee had sufficient cause for the inordinate delay in filing appeals before the NFAC, and if the delay should be condoned

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 1 2012-13 144 2 2012-13 147* 3 2013-14 144 4 2014-15 144 5 2015-16 143(3)* (not ex- parte) 7.2 However, all the orders of CIT(A) passed for all these assessment years are ex-parte without participation of assessee, wherein he has not condoned the delay

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 1 2012-13 144 2 2012-13 147* 3 2013-14 144 4 2014-15 144 5 2015-16 143(3)* (not ex- parte) 7.2 However, all the orders of CIT(A) passed for all these assessment years are ex-parte without participation of assessee, wherein he has not condoned the delay

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 1 2012-13 144 2 2012-13 147* 3 2013-14 144 4 2014-15 144 5 2015-16 143(3)* (not ex- parte) 7.2 However, all the orders of CIT(A) passed for all these assessment years are ex-parte without participation of assessee, wherein he has not condoned the delay

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 1 2012-13 144 2 2012-13 147* 3 2013-14 144 4 2014-15 144 5 2015-16 143(3)* (not ex- parte) 7.2 However, all the orders of CIT(A) passed for all these assessment years are ex-parte without participation of assessee, wherein he has not condoned the delay

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGLALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condoned the delay and admitted the appeals for adjudication. The matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, considering the High Court's observation in a similar case regarding unreasoned orders and violation of natural justice.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "144", "147

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

section 68.” 20 of page 24 ITA No.405/Bang/2023 S.P No.29/Bang/2023 N. As regards, without prejudice to the above, the learned AO has erred in holding that the appellant has failed to respond to the notice u/s 148 dated 30.06.2021 where the return of income was duly submitted. The delay in filing the return was due to the technical issues

WELCOME TRADERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2020-21

section 147, Page 4 of 8 • Consequently, understanding the necessity to file an appeal against the concluded assessment, the appellant submitted the present appeal on 14-02-2023, after a delay of 111 days," 7. Considering the above reasons, we note that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) amounts to 111 days. However, on going through

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay of 6 days is condoned in both the appeals. 5. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has filed an application for admission of additional ground that reads as under: “a. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. b. The learned assessing officer was not justified in issuing a notice under section

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay of 6 days is condoned in both the appeals. 5. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has filed an application for admission of additional ground that reads as under: “a. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. b. The learned assessing officer was not justified in issuing a notice under section

PRACTO TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), BENGALURU, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

147 of the Act were initiated accordingly notice under section 148 of the Act dated 25.03.2021 was issued, requiring the Assessee to file a return of income within 5 days from date of issue of notice. Due to the paucity of time allowed in notice under section 148 of the Act, the Assessee filed a letter with the Joint / Deputy

NILESH RATNAKAR DESHPANDE ,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal, citing the principles of substantial justice and acknowledging the possibility of counsel's mistake and the impact of the pandemic. The Tribunal restored the entire issues to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "147

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147, Rainbow Residency, Off. Circle – 3(1)(1), Sarjapura Road, Vs. Bengaluru. Junnasandra Village, Carmelaram, Bengaluru – 560 035. PAN : AAFCP 3783 R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CA Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals at the instance

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147, Rainbow Residency, Off. Circle – 3(1)(1), Sarjapura Road, Vs. Bengaluru. Junnasandra Village, Carmelaram, Bengaluru – 560 035. PAN : AAFCP 3783 R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CA Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals at the instance

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147, Rainbow Residency, Off. Circle – 3(1)(1), Sarjapura Road, Vs. Bengaluru. Junnasandra Village, Carmelaram, Bengaluru – 560 035. PAN : AAFCP 3783 R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CA Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals at the instance