ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU vs. CMR JNANADHARA TRUST, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowed the excess payment exceeding the arm’s length price (ALP), amounting to Rs. 8,60,53,373/- only. 7.1 Besides the above, the AO observed that the activities of the trust were extending to the benefit of trustee’s relatives and the companies in which the trustees were interested. Therefore, the activities of the trust are against the principles

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) of the\nPage 37 of 74\nITA Nos.642 to 645/Bang/2024\nact.\n2\n[2017] 87\nТахтапn.Com 244\n(Karnataka)\nSharavathy\nConductors (P.)\nLtd.\nV.\nChief\nCommissioner\nof\nIncome-Тах,\nBengaluru-2*\nAssesse cited case deals\nwith condonation of delay\nin filing a revised return\nof\nincome\nfor\nthe\n Assessment Year 1997-98\nunder Section

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

1) of the\nPage 37 of 74\nITA Nos. 642 to 645/Bang/2024\n2\n[2017] 87\nТахтапn.Com 244\n(Karnataka)\nact.\nSharavathy\nConductors (P.)\nLtd.\nV.\nChief\nCommissioner\nof\nIncome-Tax,\nBengaluru-2*\nAssesse cited case deals\nwith condonation of delay\nin filing a revised return\nof\nincome\nfor\nthe\n Assessment Year 1997-98\nunder Section

POWER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the additional ground is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2020-21

disallowance made by the CPC was in accordance with provisions of Section 143(1)(iv). The act mandates, before making an adjustment, an intimation has to be given to the assessee of such adjustment in writing or in electronic mode. The revenue could not produce evidence of sending the intimation to the assessee with regard to the proposed adjustment

MICROLAND LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21

161/- ( which is as per the asst. order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act) as against Rs. 9,01,28,851/- as per revised return. Page 3 of 13 10. The Learned authorities below erred in restricting the deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act to Rs. 2,71,12,299/- as against the claim

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES P. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

disallowances sustained. 8. First, we take up the appeal file by the ld. AO and also deal with connected grounds of appeal of assessee. 9. Ground No. 1 is general in nature, ground no 1 -2 of the appeal of the assessee, are general in nature, no arguments advanced and hence dismissed. 10. Ground no. 2 is against the deletion

HEWLETT PAKCARD INDIA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

disallowances sustained. 8. First, we take up the appeal file by the ld. AO and also deal with connected grounds of appeal of assessee. 9. Ground No. 1 is general in nature, ground no 1 -2 of the appeal of the assessee, are general in nature, no arguments advanced and hence dismissed. 10. Ground no. 2 is against the deletion

VINOD KUMAR SINGHAL ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2014-15

disallowed. Therefore, he observed that reassessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in terms of Page 4 of 14 section 263 of the act and not made proper verification / enquiry while making the assessments. Accordingly, he set aside the Assessment Order and directed to pass a denovo assessment with a direction

KASIREDDY RANADHEER REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

KASIREDDY RANADHEER REDDY ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

KASIREDDY RANADHEER REDDY ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

KASIREDDY RANADHEER REDDY ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

KASIREDDAY RANADHEER REDDY ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

KASIREDDAY RANADHEER REDDY ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

disallowances to the total income of the assessee. 19. Aggrieved by the actions of Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 20. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the notice u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 is without jurisdiction as the same does not fall under the period

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

1 SCR 317 : (1969) 1 SCJ 543] that “the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules” and in the same case this Court approved the following observations from the judgment of Tucker, L.J. in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk [(1949) 1 All ER 109] :“There are, in my view, no words which are of universal application to every kind

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

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

1 SCR 317 : (1969) 1 SCJ 543] that “the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules” and in the same case this Court approved the following observations from the judgment of Tucker, L.J. in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk [(1949) 1 All ER 109] :“There are, in my view, no words which are of universal application to every kind

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

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

1 SCR 317 : (1969) 1 SCJ 543] that “the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules” and in the same case this Court approved the following observations from the judgment of Tucker, L.J. in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk [(1949) 1 All ER 109] :“There are, in my view, no words which are of universal application to every kind

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

1 SCR 317 : (1969) 1 SCJ 543] that “the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules” and in the same case this Court approved the following observations from the judgment of Tucker, L.J. in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk [(1949) 1 All ER 109] :“There are, in my view, no words which are of universal application to every kind

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

1 SCR 317 : (1969) 1 SCJ 543] that “the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules” and in the same case this Court approved the following observations from the judgment of Tucker, L.J. in Russel v. Duke of Norfolk [(1949) 1 All ER 109] :“There are, in my view, no words which are of universal application to every kind