SHRI. BANGALORE NARAYAN DAS,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 & 2017-18 stands allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 120 & 121/Bang/2022 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18)

reassessment." 7. A closer look at Section 292BB shows that if the assessee has participated in the proceedings it shall be deemed that any notice which is required to be served upon was duly served and the assessee would be precluded from taking any objections that the notice was (a) not served upon him; or (b) not served upon

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

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 139(5)\n5.1. The Assessee filed the original

INMOBI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE3(1)(1), BANGALORE

reassessment or recomputation or fresh assessment, as the case may be, expires'. Since the time limit for passing of the order by the TPO is not direct but is linked with the time limit as per section 153, the legislature did not insert any sunset clause in section 153, which would have otherwise made the provision of sub-section

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

sections": [ "148", "147", "133A", "132(4)", "153C", "133(6)", "234A", "234B", "139", "143(1)", "143(3)", "142(1)", "144", "131", "151", "68", "37(1)", "40(a)(ia)", "10", "2(12A)", "127", "148(2)", "2(40)" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

2 years and 3 months after the knowledge about facts, on the basis of which section 153C proceedings are initiated. It is submitted that the same is not permissible considering the decision of this Court in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra). 5.10 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assesses in Civil Appeal

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

2 years and 3 months after the knowledge about facts, on the basis of which section 153C proceedings are initiated. It is submitted that the same is not permissible considering the decision of this Court in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra). 5.10 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assesses in Civil Appeal

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

2 years and 3 months after the knowledge about facts, on the basis of which section 153C proceedings are initiated. It is submitted that the same is not permissible considering the decision of this Court in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra). 5.10 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assesses in Civil Appeal

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

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

Section 34 of the Act that entries in the books of ITA Nos.1156 & 1163 to 1166/Bang/2023 M/s. S. Ramachandra Setty & Sons, Hassan Page 52 of 104 account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall

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

127 of the Act for change of jurisdiction and no information was provided\nto the appellant regarding the change of jurisdiction. Therefore, the assessment\ncompleted under sections 148/147 of the Act instead of 153C of the Act is bad in\nlaw. In support of his arguments, he relied on the following judgments:\n•\nSai Krupa Developers Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad

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

127 of the Act for change of jurisdiction and no information was provided to the appellant regarding the change of jurisdiction. Therefore, the assessment completed under sections 148/147 of the Act instead of 153C of the Act is bad in law. In support of his arguments, he relied on the following judgments:  Sai Krupa Developers Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), I.T.A

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

2 years and 3 months\nafter the knowledge about facts, on the basis of which section 153C proceedings\nare initiated. It is submitted that the same is not permissible considering the\ndecision of this Court in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (supra).\n5.10 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assesses in Civil Appeal Nos.\n1019

MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

reassess income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of\nsection 153A...\n10.\nIt is seen from the above that Section 153C starts with a non obstante clause, which actually\nprohibits initiation of proceedings under any section other than Section 153C under the facts and\ncircumstances as prevalent in the present case. The AO mentions in the assessment

GOPALIYENGAR MADABUSHI MURALIDHAR, ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(4), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari (Accountant Member), Shri Keshav Dubey (Judicial Member)

127 10 Gopaliyengar Madabushi Muralidhar assigning the jurisdiction to ITO, Ward 7(2)(4), Bengaluru. We found that the original notification passed on 31.05.2018 contained 100 number of cases to be notified to the jurisdictional AO concerned in which the inadvertent human errors had occurred by oversight in 3 nos. of cases out of 100 cases notified

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

reassess income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of\nsection 153A...'\n\n10. It is seen from the above that Section 153C starts with a non obstante clause, which actually\nprohibits initiation of proceedings under any section other than Section 153C under the facts and\ncircumstances as prevalent in the present case. The AO mentions