M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

M/S. SUCO SOUHARDA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., ,BELLARY vs. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

36 [excluding clause (d) of sub-section (1)], 45Y to 45ZF, 46 to 48],50,52 and 53 shall also apply, ITA Nos.263 to 271/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 11 so far as maybe, to and in relation to the State Bank of India 253[or any corresponding new bank or a Regional Rural Bank or any subsidiary bank] as they

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

penalty initiation. These instructions do not\nshow non-application of mind; rather, they are an additional layer of\nverification meant to ensure correctness and completeness of the\nassessment. The learned DR emphasised that such directions are routine\nand reflect due diligence and not mechanical approval.\n\n18.4 The learned DR also clarified that the issuance of approval letters\nand assessment

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)

36 of 74\nITA Nos.642 to 645/Bang/2024\nthe statement given by the Directors and also based on the alleged recovery\nof incriminating documents. We have also perused the written submissions\nmade by the Ld.DR which reads as follows:\nSl.\nNo.\n1\nCitation\n[1996] 86 Тахтап 122\n(Sc)\nName of the\nParties\nKumar Jagdish\nChandra Sinha\nV.\nCommissioner

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately on the concealed income as detected above.” 8.1 Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the ld. AO made similar findings and finally made addition by stating as follows: “On verification of the copies of the VAT assessment order for the financial year submitted by the VAT authorities u/s

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately on the concealed income as detected above.” 8.1 Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the ld. AO made similar findings and finally made addition by stating as follows: “On verification of the copies of the VAT assessment order for the financial year submitted by the VAT authorities u/s

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately on the concealed income as detected above.” 8.1 Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the ld. AO made similar findings and finally made addition by stating as follows: “On verification of the copies of the VAT assessment order for the financial year submitted by the VAT authorities u/s

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately on the concealed income as detected above.” 8.1 Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the ld. AO made similar findings and finally made addition by stating as follows: “On verification of the copies of the VAT assessment order for the financial year submitted by the VAT authorities u/s

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately on the concealed income as detected above.” 8.1 Similarly, for the assessment year 2014-15, the ld. AO made similar findings and finally made addition by stating as follows: “On verification of the copies of the VAT assessment order for the financial year submitted by the VAT authorities u/s

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

penalty initiation. These instructions do not\nshow non-application of mind; rather, they are an additional layer of\nverification meant to ensure correctness and completeness of the\nassessment. The learned DR emphasised that such directions are routine\nand reflect due diligence and not mechanical approval.\n18.4 The learned DR also clarified that the issuance of approval letters\nand assessment orders

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

penalty under sections 271(1)(c) of the Act. xi. The Assessee have right reserve to Amend modify delete and make any additional grounds of appeal. 2.3 During the appellate proceedings the assessee raised additional grounds of appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-2, Panaji as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in issuing notice u/s.1 53C(1

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

penalty under sections 271(1)(c) of the Act. xi. The Assessee have right reserve to Amend modify delete and make any additional grounds of appeal. 2.3 During the appellate proceedings the assessee raised additional grounds of appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-2, Panaji as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in issuing notice u/s.1 53C(1