SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

1 has held that the shareholder and the company are two separate legal entities and the business carried on by the company cannot said to be a business carried on by the shareholder. Hence, the finding of the AO that the appellant will be taxed in respect of the activities carried out by M/s. RAL is totally untenable

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

b) & (c) of the Act, and consequently the assumption of jurisdiction to make an assessment under section 153A of the Act is untenable in law. iv. The learned assessing officer failed to appreciate that a valid search is a sine qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio

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

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

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

b) & (c) of the Act, and consequently the assumption of jurisdiction to make an assessment under section 153A of the Act is untenable in law. iv. The learned assessing officer failed to appreciate that a valid search is a sine qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio

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

b) & (c) of the Act, and consequently the assumption of jurisdiction to make an assessment under section 153A of the Act is untenable in law. iv. The learned assessing officer failed to appreciate that a valid search is a sine qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI. T. NADAKRISHNA, BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 (3), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT.LTD. ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

M/S SPR SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (3) , BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 37(1) and were booked in the name of M/s.Vinayaka Fruit Mandi, M/Venkateshwara Bottle Traders and M/Srinivasa Bottle Traders. (c) The idea is to book these non-allowable expenditures in the above mentioned bogus entities, so that the main company M/s SPR Group Holdings will remain insulated from any blemish. (d) The seized material also contained books of accounts

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

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.\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 RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

b) of sub section (1) of section 153A and hence, both these clauses are separate and should not be mixed. 17. We have considered the rival submissions and in our considered opinion, as per clause (a) of sub section (1) of section 153A, at the stage of issue of notice u/s 153A, the only requirement is to ask the assessee

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

b) of sub section (1) of section 153A and hence, both these clauses are separate and should not be mixed. 17. We have considered the rival submissions and in our considered opinion, as per clause (a) of sub section (1) of section 153A, at the stage of issue of notice u/s 153A, the only requirement is to ask the assessee

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

b) of sub section (1) of section 153A and hence, both these clauses are separate and should not be mixed. 17. We have considered the rival submissions and in our considered opinion, as per clause (a) of sub section (1) of section 153A, at the stage of issue of notice u/s 153A, the only requirement is to ask the assessee