M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

1,89,14,063/- is not arising out of any incriminating material found during the course of search and consequently the addition made in a proceedings under section 153A of the Act which is not arising out ITA Nos.21 to 26/Bang/2024 Page 9 of 47 of incriminating material is unsustainable in law on the facts and circumstances of the case

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)

1. The impugned proceedings under Section 153A\nand the impugned order under Section 153A dated\n29.09.2021 are bad and non-est as the notices under\nSection 153A dated 04.11.2020 and under Section 143(2)\ndated 27.02.2021 were issued by the Learned Assistant\nCommissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2 before\nobtaining the jurisdiction vide order of centralization of the\nPrincipal

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

1. The impugned orders of the lower authorities are\nnot justified in law and on the facts and\ncircumstances of the case.\n2. As regards the impugned proceedings under\nSection 153A and the impugned order under Section\n153A dated 29.09.2021 being invalid and without\njurisdiction:\n2.1. The impugned proceedings under Section 153A\nand the impugned order under Section 153A dated

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

disallowance of depreciation on goodwill not arising from incriminating material, were not justified. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention that the consideration paid in excess of tangible assets was rightly classified as goodwill.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "132", "153A", "143(3)", "250", "32(1

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

sections": [ "132", "153A", "143(3)", "250", "234A", "234B", "234C", "32(1)(ii)", "147", "148", "132(1)", "132(2)", "132A", "263", "143(2)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

1)(a),(b) & (c) of the Act, and consequently the assumption\nof\njurisdiction to make an assessment under section 153A of\nthe Act is untenable in law.\n\niv)\nThe learned assessing officer failed to appreciate that a valid\nsearch is a sine qua non for making a valid assessment\nunder section 153A of the Act on the parity

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1) , MANGALURU

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu\Nand\Nshri Soundararajan K.\Nita Nos.642 To 645/Bang/2024\N Assessment Years : 2017-18 To\N2020-21\Nm/S. Bharat Beedi Works\Nprivate Limited,\Ngolden Jubilee Building,\Nbharath Bagh,\Nkadri Road,\Nmangaluru – 575 002.\Npan: Aaacb9001B\Nappellant\Nassessee By\Nrevenue By\N: Shri Chythanya .K, Sr.\Nadvocate\N: Shri E. Shridhar, Cit-Dr\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\Norder\Nper Bench\Nthese Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Orders Of\Nthe Ld.Cit(A) -2, Panaji Dated 30/01/2024 In Respect Of The A.Ys.2017-18,\N2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee For\Neach Of The Assessment Years Are Extracted Hereunder For The Sack Of\Nconvenience.\Npage 2 Of 74\Nita Nos.642 To 645/Bang/2024\N Assessment Year 2017-18:\N“1. The Impugned Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are Not\Njustified In Law & On The Facts & Circumstances Of The\Ncase.\N2. The Impugned Assessment Proceedings & The\Nimpugned Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Dated\N29.11.2021 Are Bad & Non-Est Since The Notice Under\Nsection 143(2) Dated 13.08.2018 Was Issued Without\Naffixing Any Signature Either Manually Or Digitally.\N3. Without Prejudice To The Above, Impugned Assessment\Nproceedings & The Impugned Assessment Order Under\Nsection 143(3) Dated 29.11.2021 Are Bad & Non-Est\Nbeing Based On The Notice Under Section 143(2) Dated\N13.08.2018 Which Is Vague, Without Of Application Of Mind\Nand Contrary To Section 143(2) & Applicable Board\Ncirculars & Instructions.\N4. As Regards Disallowance Under Section 14A U/S Rule\N8D(2)(Ii):\N4.

1. The impugned proceedings under Section 153A\nand the impugned order under Section 153A dated\n29.09.2021 are bad and non-est as the notices under\nSection 153A dated 04.11.2020 and under Section 143(2)\ndated 27.02.2021 were issued by the Learned Assistant\nCommissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2 before\nobtaining the jurisdiction vide order of centralization of the\nPrincipal

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153A of the Act on 20.7.2009 is to be considered as true and he has nothing to declare as undisclosed income. This has been countered by the ld. AO by observing as under:  “The assessee has stated that the loan advanced to Sri Mahesh is R 2,10,00,000.  As the balance shown in the return of income

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153A of the Act on 20.7.2009 is to be considered as true and he has nothing to declare as undisclosed income. This has been countered by the ld. AO by observing as under:  “The assessee has stated that the loan advanced to Sri Mahesh is R 2,10,00,000.  As the balance shown in the return of income

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

153A is a curable defect under section 292BB of the Act under the facts & circumstances of the case. c) The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the jurisdictional defects cannot be cured under section 292BB of the Act and thus the assessment completed under section 153C of the Act ought to have been quashed under the facts & circumstances

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

153A is a curable defect under section 292BB of the Act under the facts & circumstances of the case. c) The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the jurisdictional defects cannot be cured under section 292BB of the Act and thus the assessment completed under section 153C of the Act ought to have been quashed under the facts & circumstances

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

153A is a curable defect under section 292BB of the Act under the facts & circumstances of the case. c) The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the jurisdictional defects cannot be cured under section 292BB of the Act and thus the assessment completed under section 153C of the Act ought to have been quashed under the facts & circumstances

INCOME TAX OFFICER W 1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 HASSAN, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONGS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

M/S. S. RAMASHANDRA SETTY & SONS,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, VIJAYANAGAR vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY & SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

153A dated 29.09.2021 is bad and invalid\nas the same is barred by limitation under Section\n153B(1).\n\n2. It is submitted that the aforesaid ground was\ninadvertently not raised in the appeal memorandum. The\naforesaid ground, being legal ground, may be decided on\nthe basis of facts which are already on record. The\nomission to raise the aforesaid