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

In the result the ITA No

CASH\" on the issue of cash deposits during demonetization period\". It\nwould indicate that the case was selected for scrutiny but for the issue of cash deposit during\ndemonetization, this mention of the issue would indicate that it was for a limited purpose of\nscrutinizing the cash deposits during demonetization. Its scope for making other additions\nwould only be enlarged

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

cash deposited in bank account in his regular return of income u/s 139 of the Act and the AO had information in the form of statements recorded which is definite information and corroborated with the bank statement found during the course of survey. In a nutshell we can say that the at the time of recording reasons for initiating assessment

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

MR. MOHAMMED SAFWAN,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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

MR. MOHAMMED SAFWAN,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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

MR. M.N. 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

deposit ITA No.62 to 66, 67, 68,88 & 89/Bang/2020 Page 29 of 54 in the bank account of Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur and the basis of this allegation is this that Mr. V. K. Abdul Gaffur does not have the ability to buy the high-end vehicle. In para 7 of the assessment order, these facts are noted

SRI. B.V. RAVIKUMAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

cash deposited is nothing but unaccounted money and brought the same to tax u/s. 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the sum of ITA Nos.137 & 138/B/2022 Page 25 of 31 Rs.45,69,966 for AY 2014-15 and an amount of Rs.50,95,263 for AY 2015-16 is brought to tax in the hands of the assessee towards the deposits

SRI. B.V. RAVIKUMAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

cash deposited is nothing but unaccounted money and brought the same to tax u/s. 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the sum of ITA Nos.137 & 138/B/2022 Page 25 of 31 Rs.45,69,966 for AY 2014-15 and an amount of Rs.50,95,263 for AY 2015-16 is brought to tax in the hands of the assessee towards the deposits

SMT. K.R. GEETHA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(3)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

cash deposited is nothing but unaccounted money and brought the same to tax u/s. 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the sum of ITA Nos.137 & 138/B/2022 Page 25 of 31 Rs.45,69,966 for AY 2014-15 and an amount of Rs.50,95,263 for AY 2015-16 is brought to tax in the hands of the assessee towards the deposits

SMT. K.R. GEETHA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(3)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

cash deposited is nothing but unaccounted money and brought the same to tax u/s. 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the sum of ITA Nos.137 & 138/B/2022 Page 25 of 31 Rs.45,69,966 for AY 2014-15 and an amount of Rs.50,95,263 for AY 2015-16 is brought to tax in the hands of the assessee towards the deposits

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

cash deposits in the assessee's bank account, purportedly made by Shri D. S. Nandish. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in above\nterms

deposited unaccounted cash into the appellant's bank account. Subsequently, a search operation was conducted. The Assessing Officer (AO) re-opened the assessment under Section 148, alleging escapement of income based on survey and search materials. The appellant challenged the validity of the reassessment

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

deposited cash. In the list prepared where the name of the assessee Smt. . Nandish is at Sl. No.16 where the amount appearing is Rs.62,00,000/-, 40,65,500/- Rs.2,49,800/- respectively for the three AYs and it is included in the total disclosure made by Shri. D. S. Nandish during the search proceedings. It clearly shows that

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

deposited cash. In the list prepared where the name of the assessee Smt. . Nandish is at Sl. No.16 where the amount appearing is Rs.62,00,000/-, 40,65,500/- Rs.2,49,800/- respectively for the three AYs and it is included in the total disclosure made by Shri. D. S. Nandish during the search proceedings. It clearly shows that