SRI BANKAPUR CHANNABASAPPA UMAPATHI ,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(5), DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

carried forward. ITA Nos.53/Bang/2023 Sri Bankapura Channabasappa Umapathi, Devangere Page 5 of 8 4.2 The AO noted that in the return of income filed originally on 27.11.2014, the assessee had not claimed any business loss or short- term capital loss. The claim made by the assessee in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. The AO observed that

SRI BANKAPUR CHANNABASAPPA UMAPATHI ,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(5), DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

carried forward. ITA Nos.53/Bang/2023 Sri Bankapura Channabasappa Umapathi, Devangere Page 5 of 8 4.2 The AO noted that in the return of income filed originally on 27.11.2014, the assessee had not claimed any business loss or short- term capital loss. The claim made by the assessee in the return filed u/s.153A of the Act. The AO observed that

KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result the ITA No

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

reassessment proceedings were thus infructuous and invalid. The assessee succeeds for this short reason alone. In any case, the reasons recorded while reopening the ITA Nos.1617 and 1618/Bang/2024 Page 30 of 45 assessment are disapproved, on merits, by the CIT(A) and those findings remain unchallenged and controverted. In this view of the matter, we also see no need

THE HAMLET,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER-WARD-6(2)(4), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. The Hamlet, No. 11, Kemwell House, The Income Tax Tumkur Road, Officer, Yeshwanthpur, Ward – 6(2)(4), Bangalore – 560 022. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaaft6690D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri H.N. Kincha, Ca : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit - Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 24-08-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-11-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of The Order Dated 27.12.2022 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Passing The Appellate Order In The Manner Passed. The Appellate Order As Passed Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. In Any Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Should Have Quashed, The Order Passed By Assessing Officer Or Atleast Should Have Deleted The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer.

carried forward and interest levied thereon be deleted.” Page 4 of 52 M/s. The Hamlet, Bangalore 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1 Assessee is a firm doing its business of real estate and infrastructure development. For the year under consideration, it filed its return of income on 30.07.2012 declaring short term capital loss of Rs.1

M/S. SHIVA FERRIC PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Shiva Ferric Pvt. Ltd., No. 193, 4Th Floor, Shiv The Principal Sadan Outer Ring Road, Commissioner Of B. Narayanapura, Income-Tax [Central], Bangalore – 560 016. Bengaluru. Vs. Pan: Aaics4564L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 17-01-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 24-01-2023 Order Per Padmavathy S

reassessment order on account of unexplained share premium received is settled by the assessee under DTVSV Scheme, however the issue of unexplained share capital of Rs. 40,46,000/- was not considered by the assessing officer during assessment proceedings and no addition was made, eventhough the information of the same was available with the AO during assessment proceedings. Regarding settlement

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARI vs. M/S. NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST, RAICHUR

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

loss to be carried forward. Under section 139(4) of the Act any person who has not furnished return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1), or within time allowed under a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 of the Act, may furnish the return for any previous year at any time before expiry

M/S SYNDICATE BANK,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, UDUPI

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

forwards losses.” 7.1 In view of the above judgement of Hon’ble High Court, this ground of assessee is dismissed. 8. Next ground for our consideration is ground no.4 with regard to applicability of provisions of section 115JB of the Act. ITA No.1219/Bang/2019 & ITA No.186/PAN/2019 Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore Page 12 of 32 8.1 Facts of the case

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

reassessment proceedings was quashed. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ITA Nos.1457, 1466, 1467/Bang/2012 & T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore Page 39 of 107 Cochin, in ITA No.442/Coch/2018 dated 07-02-2019 in the case of CIT vs Toms Enterprises has quashed the proceedings on similar grounds. Therefore, proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely on the basis

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

reassessment proceedings was quashed. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ITA Nos.1457, 1466, 1467/Bang/2012 & T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore Page 39 of 107 Cochin, in ITA No.442/Coch/2018 dated 07-02-2019 in the case of CIT vs Toms Enterprises has quashed the proceedings on similar grounds. Therefore, proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely on the basis

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. T.G. RANGANATH, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

reassessment proceedings was quashed. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ITA Nos.1457, 1466, 1467/Bang/2012 & T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore Page 39 of 107 Cochin, in ITA No.442/Coch/2018 dated 07-02-2019 in the case of CIT vs Toms Enterprises has quashed the proceedings on similar grounds. Therefore, proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely on the basis

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

Appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating \nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the \nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\n\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned \nCIT(A) based on above extracted observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court, \nwe note that

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating \nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the \nAO including the income declared in the returns."\n\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned \nCIT(A) based on above extracted observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court, \nwe note that

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating\nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the\nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 27 of 116\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned\nCIT

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating\nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the\nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 28 of 116\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned\nCIT

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating\nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the\nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 28 of 116\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned\nCIT

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating\nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the\nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 28 of 116\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned\nCIT

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating\nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the\nAO including the income declared in the returns.\"\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 28 of 116\n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned\nCIT

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3) , , BANGALORE

reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating \nmaterial unearthed during the search and the other material available with the \nAO including the income declared in the returns."\n\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 \nPage 28 of 116 \n26.1 Without going into the veracity of inference drawn by the learned \nCIT