M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issues, therefore these are disposed of by this common order. AY 2012-13 (ITA No.2315/Bang/2024) ( By Assessee) 2. First we take up the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 in ITA No.2315/Bang/2024 which is filed against the consolidated Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issues, therefore these are disposed of by this common order. AY 2012-13 (ITA No.2315/Bang/2024) ( By Assessee) 2. First we take up the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 in ITA No.2315/Bang/2024 which is filed against the consolidated Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issues, therefore these are disposed of by this common order. AY 2012-13 (ITA No.2315/Bang/2024) ( By Assessee) 2. First we take up the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 in ITA No.2315/Bang/2024 which is filed against the consolidated Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , MANGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowance of Rs.19,39,60,866/- was based solely on third party information, which was not subjected to any further scrutiny. Thus, the CIT (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: "Thus, the entire disallowance in this case is based on third party information gathered by the Investigation Wing of the Department, which have not been independently subjected

S R CONSTRUCTIONS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

disallowance made u/s. 40A(3) for AY 2016-17. ITA Nos.636, 637/Bang/2025 ITA Nos.768, 769/Bang/2025 Page 6 of 60 5. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that search and seizure

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

seizure in the case of Mr. Sadhu Salian. This being the intent and purpose of the provisions contained in section 153A and 153C, stands satisfied if the notice is responded and the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings. In the present case, the assessee participated in the proceedings, assessee cannot be allowed to turn around or raise objections

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

seizure in the case of Mr. Sadhu Salian. This being the intent and purpose of the provisions contained in section 153A and 153C, stands satisfied if the notice is responded and the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings. In the present case, the assessee participated in the proceedings, assessee cannot be allowed to turn around or raise objections

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issues, therefore these are disposed of by this common order. AY 2012-13 (ITA No.2315/Bang/2024) ( By Assessee) 2. First we take up the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 in ITA No.2315/Bang/2024 which is filed against the consolidated Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issues, therefore these are disposed of by this common order. AY 2012-13 (ITA No.2315/Bang/2024) ( By Assessee) 2. First we take up the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 in ITA No.2315/Bang/2024 which is filed against the consolidated Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income

R G PATIL & COMPANY,HAVERI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI

In the result, these 2 appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

search and seizure, the assessee made a statement which ITA Nos.352 - 357/Bang/2021 Page 22 of 30 was recorded by the officers of the Revenue. Stress was laid by the Tribunal on the expression "voluntary" but the Tribunal failed to understand that the meaning of the expression "voluntary" in the context is that the statement made by him was not extorted

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

searched person". Having not reached this conclusion, the AO chose to make protective assessment. Two inferences can be drawn from this action of the AO: - (i) the seized material is not conclusive proof to make assessment under section 153A in case of assessee and hence, he chose either to invoke section 153C himself [where he has jurisdiction over the assessee

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

searched person". Having not reached this conclusion, the AO chose to make protective assessment. Two inferences can be drawn from this action of the AO: - (i) the seized material is not conclusive proof to make assessment under section 153A in case of assessee and hence, he chose either to invoke section 153C himself [where he has jurisdiction over the assessee

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

searched person". Having not reached this conclusion, the AO chose to make protective assessment. Two inferences can be drawn from this action of the AO: - (i) the seized material is not conclusive proof to make assessment under section 153A in case of assessee and hence, he chose either to invoke section 153C himself [where he has jurisdiction over the assessee

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

searched person". Having not reached this conclusion, the AO chose to make protective assessment. Two inferences can be drawn from this action of the AO: - (i) the seized material is not conclusive proof to make assessment under section 153A in case of assessee and hence, he chose either to invoke section 153C himself [where he has jurisdiction over the assessee

KRISHNAMURTHY L/R BY SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of hire charges. 8. He further submitted that the profit rate declared by the assessee is 3.01% which is more than the industry norms and relied on the judgment of jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court in ITA No.213/2014 dated 14.10.2014 in the case of M/s. Deluxe Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT in ITA No.213/2014, Order dated 14.10.2014 and submitted

KRISHNAMURTHY L/R BY SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of hire charges. 8. He further submitted that the profit rate declared by the assessee is 3.01% which is more than the industry norms and relied on the judgment of jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court in ITA No.213/2014 dated 14.10.2014 in the case of M/s. Deluxe Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT in ITA No.213/2014, Order dated 14.10.2014 and submitted

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

search cases should be made with the prior approval of\nsuperior authority. As such, the higher authority should apply their mind on the\nmaterials gathered during search and other relevant circumstances based on\nwhich the officer is making the assessment. Furthermore, the AO should frame\nthe assessment after due application of mind after evaluating the seized\nmaterials. Thus, the superior

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowed. 8. The learned CIT[A] further ought to have appreciated that sanction u/s.153D was accorded is without application of mind and such a mechanically granted approval vitiates the assessment order rendering it to be held illegal and void-ab-initio under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 9. Without prejudice to the right

S.R. RAVISHANKAR,CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri. S. R. Ravishankar, Vs. Acit, No.80, 1St Main Road, Central Circle – 2(4), Chamarajpet, Bengaluru- 560018. Bangalore. Pan : Aclpr 5363 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2025

seizure and would not have been found to be so. Had the search not been conducted, additional income of Rs.3 Crores would not have been offered to tax had the search not taken place. Accordingly, the AO observed that case of the assessee comes under section 271AAB(1) of the Act. Accordingly, penalty of Rs.30 lakhs was imposed