K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

house property and other sources. The assessee has been maintaining books of account for the business carried on and the same is also subject to audit u/s 44AB of the Act. 2.2 For the year under appeal, the assessee e-filed his return of income on 27/10/2017 declaring a total loss of Rs.25,25,971/- from the aforesaid sources

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

house property and other sources. The assessee has been maintaining books of account for the business carried on and the same is also subject to audit u/s 44AB of the Act. 2.2 For the year under appeal, the assessee e-filed his return of income on 27/10/2017 declaring a total loss of Rs.25,25,971/- from the aforesaid sources

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

Housing, though the material found in the possession of the other person, the Assessing Officer was justified in considering the same in the proceedings under section 153A of the Act. Further the Act does not contemplate parallel proceedings under section 153A and 153C of the Act. The acceptance of the contention of the assessee would be contrary to the scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHICKAMANGALUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (3), BENGALURU vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTHA, CHICKAMANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANATH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

VISHWANATHAREDDY CHENNAREDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(7), BENGALURU

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

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act in the books of the Assessee. The learned CIT (Appeals) completely erred in including the expenditure in the taxable income under Section 68 of the Act, a section that the learned Assessing Officer did not invoke. Moreover, the learned CIT (Appeals) failed to provide adequate justification for applying cash credit provisions

CHANDRA SHEKHAR ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari (Accountant Member), Shri Soundararajan K. (Judicial Member)

house property, income from construction business, income from contract work and income from travel business. The AO also treated the cash credits as unexplained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, MANGALURU vs. MR. MOHAMMED SAFWAN, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

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

property and loan repaid by Abdul Gaffur. Second gift claimed in this year is of Rs. 15 Lacs claimed to have been received from sister Khadeejamma. About this gift, the findings of the AO are on page 56 of the assessment order but the findings are vague. The AO has noted that initially the amount was transferred from har BUCB

MR. M.A. SIDDIQUE,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

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

property and loan repaid by Abdul Gaffur. Second gift claimed in this year is of Rs. 15 Lacs claimed to have been received from sister Khadeejamma. About this gift, the findings of the AO are on page 56 of the assessment order but the findings are vague. The AO has noted that initially the amount was transferred from har BUCB

MR. M.A. SIDDIQUE,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in the case of Mr

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

property and loan repaid by Abdul Gaffur. Second gift claimed in this year is of Rs. 15 Lacs claimed to have been received from sister Khadeejamma. About this gift, the findings of the AO are on page 56 of the assessment order but the findings are vague. The AO has noted that initially the amount was transferred from har BUCB