AKSHAY KUMAR RUNGTA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

2 of 31 3. Grounds on reopening: a. Grounds on notice issued under section 148: i. The notice issued under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. ii. The reopening of assessment is void ab initio as the reasons recorded by the learned assessing officer is based on borrowed satisfaction and that there is no independent application

INTACT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals of the assessee for the AY 2015-16\nto AY 2017-18 are allowed

Reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AYs 2015-16 to 2017-18. The assessee requested to treat a previously filed return as the one filed in response to the Section 148 notice.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to issue the mandatory notice under Section 143(2

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 197, in respect to deductibility of tax on similar receipts - The CIT(A) highlighted that section 195(2) and section 197 of the Act are in the nature of safeguard sections to make sure that taxes are rightfully deducted on payments. - The CIT(A) has thereafter contended that the Assessee has not availed any of the safeguards and basis

INTACT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

148 of the Act. 13. In DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications [2010] 323 ITR 249 (Delhi), this Court invalidated an reassessment proceedings ITA Nos.823 to 824/Bang/2025 Intact Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 18 of 23 after noting that the notice under Section 143(2

INTACT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

148 of the Act. 13. In DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications [2010] 323 ITR 249 (Delhi), this Court invalidated an reassessment proceedings ITA Nos.823 to 824/Bang/2025 Intact Developers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 18 of 23 after noting that the notice under Section 143(2

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

reassessment u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.06.2021 relying on the extension of time limits mentioned in notification bearing No. 20/2021 F.no.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 31.03.2021 and notification No.38/2021/ F.No.370142/35/2020-TPL dated 27.04.2021. The copy of the notice u/s 148 dated 30.06.2021 is attached herewith as Annexure 2 of this paper book. In this regard

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\n- The AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\n- Receipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

IBM CHINA HONG KONG LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\nThe AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\nReceipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\n- The AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\nReceipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\nThe AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\nReceipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

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

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\n- The AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\nReceipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

2)(a)\nof the Act are applicable\nThe AO has levied penalty for under-\nreporting of income, which is the same\nreason that was recorded in the\nassessment order read with the\ncorrigendum\nReceipts were offered to tax only after\na notice under section 148 of the Act\nwas issued, initiating the reassessment

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

148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a\nperson where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account,\nother documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after\nthe 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall—\n9\n(a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

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