SIMPLEX TMC PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

14,75,000/-. 2.4. Against this assessee went in appeal before ld. CIT(A), who has confirmed the penalty order. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 3. First ground for our consideration is as follows: “On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action

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)

14,691/-\nd) Disallowance u/s.14A – Rs.53,61,903/-\n6.\nInsofar as the assessment year 2020-21 is concerned, the AO made\nthe additions under the following heads.\na) Disallowing the quantum of purchases of tendu leaves for want of\ndocumentation – Rs.1,55,45,376/-\nb) The addition made under the head undervaluation of stock u/s.145A\nof the Act – Rs.68

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

271 (Delhi - Trib.) (para 20) {CLI 2 Pg.\n629}.\n4.11. Hence the approval under Section 153D dated 28.09.2021 is bad\nand invalid. Consequently, the assessment orders for the AYs 2018-\n19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 are bad and invalid without valid\napproval under Section 153D.\n5. As regards revised return filed being invalid and contrary to\nSection

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue as well as\nCos of the Assessee for the Asst

penalty was to be levied on the tax\nassessed under section 143 or as demanded under section 156 being tax assessed\nminus the amount paid under the provisional assessment order. The hon'ble\nSupreme Court before resorting to the interpretation of term in addition to the\namount of the tax, if any, payable by him as appearing in section 271

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

14 of 30 order. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing the same as under:- 5. Ground no.3 and 4 for all the 3 assessment years are on the issue of that the appellant voluntarily declared amount during the course of search which cannot be called as undisclosed income. The second argument is that once the return is filed

SHRI. MUNINAGA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for A

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

14,038. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was initiated simultaneously on all the above four disallowances made in the order of assessment (supra). The Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, levying the minimum penalty on all the above four disallowances amounting to Rs.1

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not even furnished a return of income for the Asst. Year in question, till the Department issued a notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the registration u/s 12A w.e.f. 01.04.1998 would

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

penalty was to be levied on the tax assessed under section 143 or as demanded under section 156 being tax assessed minus the amount paid under the provisional assessment order. The hon'ble Supreme Court before resorting to the interpretation of term in addition to the amount of the tax, if any, payable by him as appearing in section 271

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

271 (Delhi - Trib.) (para 20) {CLI 2 – Pg.\n629}.\n\n4. 11. Hence the approval under Section 153D dated 28.09.2021 is bad\nand invalid. Consequently, the assessment orders for the AYs 2018-\n19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 are bad and invalid without valid\napproval under Section 153D.\n\n5. As regards revised return filed being invalid and contrary

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

In the result, all 13 appeals of the assessee are allowed

2. First, we take up and decide Six Appeals in respect of Penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271B of I T Act, 1961. This penalty was imposed for this reason that the assessee did not furnish Tax Audit Report for these years as required u/s 44AB of I T Act, 1961. The amount of Penalty

M/S SYNDICATE BANK ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazin Ita Nos. A.Y. Appellant(S) Vs. Respondent 709/Bang/2019 2012-13 Syndicate Bank, 2011-12 Rajajinagar Main Branch, Ramamandir Road, 3Rd Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010. Tan : Blrs 00880 F Pan: Aaccs 4699E 710/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 735/Bang/2019 2013-14 Jayanagar Market Complex Branch, The Assistant 12Th Main Road, Commissioner Of 3Rd Block, Jayanagar, Income Tax (Tds), Bangalore-560 011. Tan : Blrs 16148 G Range 3, Pan: Aaccs 4699E Bangalore. 711/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 2013-14 Bit Branch, K.R. Road,V V Puram, Bangalore-560 004. Tan : Blrs 16186 C Pan: Aaccs 4699E 712/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, Vijaya College Br., R V Road, Basavangudi Bangalore – 560 004. Tan : Blrs 15334 E Pan: Aaccs 4699E

271, section 271A, section 271AA, section 271B , section 271BA, section 271BB, section 271C, section 271CA, section 271D, section 271E, section 271F, section 271FA, section 271FB, section 271G, section 271H, clause (c) or clause (d) of sub section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 272B or subsection (1) or subsection

M/S SYNDICATE BANK ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazin Ita Nos. A.Y. Appellant(S) Vs. Respondent 709/Bang/2019 2012-13 Syndicate Bank, 2011-12 Rajajinagar Main Branch, Ramamandir Road, 3Rd Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010. Tan : Blrs 00880 F Pan: Aaccs 4699E 710/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 735/Bang/2019 2013-14 Jayanagar Market Complex Branch, The Assistant 12Th Main Road, Commissioner Of 3Rd Block, Jayanagar, Income Tax (Tds), Bangalore-560 011. Tan : Blrs 16148 G Range 3, Pan: Aaccs 4699E Bangalore. 711/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 2013-14 Bit Branch, K.R. Road,V V Puram, Bangalore-560 004. Tan : Blrs 16186 C Pan: Aaccs 4699E 712/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, Vijaya College Br., R V Road, Basavangudi Bangalore – 560 004. Tan : Blrs 15334 E Pan: Aaccs 4699E

271, section 271A, section 271AA, section 271B , section 271BA, section 271BB, section 271C, section 271CA, section 271D, section 271E, section 271F, section 271FA, section 271FB, section 271G, section 271H, clause (c) or clause (d) of sub section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 272B or subsection (1) or subsection

M/S. SYNDICATE BANK,GANDHINAGAR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RANGE- 3, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazin Ita Nos. A.Y. Appellant(S) Vs. Respondent 709/Bang/2019 2012-13 Syndicate Bank, 2011-12 Rajajinagar Main Branch, Ramamandir Road, 3Rd Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010. Tan : Blrs 00880 F Pan: Aaccs 4699E 710/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 735/Bang/2019 2013-14 Jayanagar Market Complex Branch, The Assistant 12Th Main Road, Commissioner Of 3Rd Block, Jayanagar, Income Tax (Tds), Bangalore-560 011. Tan : Blrs 16148 G Range 3, Pan: Aaccs 4699E Bangalore. 711/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, 2013-14 Bit Branch, K.R. Road,V V Puram, Bangalore-560 004. Tan : Blrs 16186 C Pan: Aaccs 4699E 712/Bang/2019 2011-12 Syndicate Bank, Vijaya College Br., R V Road, Basavangudi Bangalore – 560 004. Tan : Blrs 15334 E Pan: Aaccs 4699E

271, section 271A, section 271AA, section 271B , section 271BA, section 271BB, section 271C, section 271CA, section 271D, section 271E, section 271F, section 271FA, section 271FB, section 271G, section 271H, clause (c) or clause (d) of sub section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 272B or subsection (1) or subsection