K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

condone the delay in filing the present appeal against the order\nof the learned Assessing Officer under section 153A r.w.s 143(3) r.w.s. 153D

KHODAY ESHWARSA AND SONS ( PRESENTLY KHODAY ESHWARSA AND SONS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) BANGALORE, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

section 153D of the Act is thereby allowed. Hence ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. . ITA No.1079 & 1080/Bang/2024 Page 12 of 14 Coming to ITA No. 1080/Bang/2024, an appeal by the assessee. 8. In the present case, the appeal was filed by the assessee against

KHODAY ESHWARSA AND SONS PVT LTD (FORMERLY MS KHODAY ESHWARSA AND SONS),BANGALORE vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) BGL, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed\nfor statistical purposes

delay.", "held": "For ITA No. 1079/Bang/2024, the Tribunal held that the approval granted under Section 153D was done mechanically without proper application of mind, rendering the assessment order invalid and bad in law. For ITA No. 1080/Bang/2024, the Tribunal condoned

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the four A

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K. (Judicial Member)

condonation of delay is\na discretionary matter and\nthe authority's decision\ncannot be interfered with\nunless it is arbitrary or\nunreasonable.\n3\n[2023] 155\nТахтапп.Com 606\n(Delhi)\nPrincipal\nCommissioner\nof\nIncome-Tax-7\nV.\nOptimal Media\nSolutions Ltd.\nThe case law citied by the\nAssesse, The Head Note\nwhich reads below Section\n14A of the Income

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

Section 153D dated 28.09.2021 is bad\nand invalid. Consequently, the assessment orders for the AYs 2018-\n19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 are bad and invalid without valid\napproval under Section 153D.\n5. As regards revised return filed being invalid and contrary to\nSection 139(5)\n5.1. The Assessee filed the original return of income

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

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

Section 153D dated 28.09.2021 is bad\nand invalid. Consequently, the assessment orders for the AYs 2018-\n19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 are bad and invalid without valid\napproval under Section 153D.\n\n5. As regards revised return filed being invalid and contrary to\nSection 139(5)\n\n5. 1. The Assessee filed the original return of income

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

delay by filing condonation petition supported by an affidavit. In the application Assessee submits that assessment order under section 153C read with section 144 read with section 153D

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

delay by filing condonation petition supported by an affidavit. In the application Assessee submits that assessment order under section 153C read with section 144 read with section 153D

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

delay by filing condonation petition supported by an affidavit. In the application Assessee submits that assessment order under section 153C read with section 144 read with section 153D

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

delay by filing condonation petition supported by an affidavit. In the application Assessee submits that assessment order under section 153C read with section 144 read with section 153D

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

condonation of delay by filing\ncondonation petition supported by an affidavit. In the application\nAssessee submits that assessment order under section 153C read\nwith section 144 read with section 153D

HINDUSTAN MARBLE & GRANITE ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyhindustan Marble & Granite Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Regd. Office: No.5, Lalbagh- Cr Building, Queens Rod Hosur Road, Wilson Garden Vs. Bengaluru 560001 Bangalore 560027 Pan – Aaafh8437Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By: Shri V. Parithivel, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M.

condoning the delay, ignoring the facts of the case and Affidavit furnished by the Appellant wherein the reason for the delay was explained. 2 Hindustan Marble & Granite 3. The learned CITA has failed to appreciate the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal which was purely due to improper serving of the penalty order in as much

SHRI. K. MUNIRAJU,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed by assessee for asst

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

condoned the delay of 13 days caused by assessee in filing present appeals. 5. Ld.AR submitted that, for all years under consideration, identical Additional Ground Nos:12-13 are raised by assessee, being legal issue, challenging validity of order passed under section 263. For sake of convenience we are reproducing additional ground No. 12-13 from assessment year

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

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Condor Developers The Deputy Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 40, Old Kanakpura Income Tax, Main Road, Central Circle – Basvangudi, 1(1), Bangalore – 560 004. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabch6554Q Appellant Respondent : Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Assessee By Gaddi, Ca : Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Revenue By Jcit Dr Itat Date Of Hearing : 31-01-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2023 Order Per Anikesh Banerjeethe Appeal Of The Assessee Was Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Bangalore {In Brevity The Cit(A)} By Order Dated 22.08.2022, Order Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Brevity The Act) For A.Y. 2018-19. The Impugned Order Was Emanated From The Order Of The Ld. Dcit, Central Circle -1(1), Bangalore, Order Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 153D Of The Act, By Order Dated 27.12.2019. Page 2 Of 8 2. The Assessee Filed A Condonation Petition For 4 Days Delay. The Delay Is Negligible. So, With The Consent Of The Ar, The Delay Is Condoned.

153D of the Act, by order dated 27.12.2019. Page 2 of 8 2. The assessee filed a condonation petition for 4 days delay. The delay is negligible. So, with the consent of the AR, the delay is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. The Order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle

M/S. CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

condone the delay for 4 days in both the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.532/Bang/2024 (AY 2015-16): 2. Facts of the issue in this appeal are that the appellant, engaged in real estate project development in Bangalore and affiliated with various grot+ companies and firms, was subject to a search and seizure operation under Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. R. MUNIRAJU (HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11

section 153C that the said seized document does not pertain to Trans Global Power Ltd. but to the assessee. The AO of the assessee after examining the JDA and satisfied that the same belongs to the assessee initiated proceedings u/s.153C. The AO on examination of the JDA was of the view capital gains arises at the time of execution

UMAYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

In the result the orders of the Ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D was a provision of sanction which wasaccorded without application of mind and such a mechanically granted approval vitiates the Assessment Order rendering it to be held illegal and void-ab-initio. 4. The brief facts of the case shows that Assessee has also raised an additional ground of appeal stating that impugned order was passed u/s. 153C

UMAYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result the orders of the Ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D was a provision of sanction which wasaccorded without application of mind and such a mechanically granted approval vitiates the Assessment Order rendering it to be held illegal and void-ab-initio. 4. The brief facts of the case shows that Assessee has also raised an additional ground of appeal stating that impugned order was passed u/s. 153C

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

153D, dated 31.12.2018 for the AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17ITA 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. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 19 of 147 and u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153D