M/S. EDUCATIONAL CONCEPTS INNOVATORS INTERNATIONAL ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

reassess the income of the assessee and accordingly, the proceeding which has been concluded is invalid and bad in law. Further, the assessee has also raised ground relating to AO having not followed proper procedure before and after issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act and as well as sanction u/s 151 of the Act and accordingly proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGLAURU vs. SHRI KEMPAREDDY GOVINDRAJU, DOMLUR, BENGALURU

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA No’s 1022 to 1024/ Bang/ 2024, for the Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

section 133(6) from the Lokayukta by the AO and he observed that there is difference in the jewellery declared. Therefore, the information received from the Lokayukta is part and parcel of the incriminating documents found during the course of search. The assessee has not explained the apparent discrepancies in his own statements on affidavit before the statutory authorities

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)

207 v. ITAT Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Arwa Hararwala v. ITO Ward-7(2)(2) in ITA No. 01/Bang/2020 vi. ITAT Banglore Tribunal in the case of Marlabs Innovations Pvt.Ltd. (sucdessor of Marlabs Software Pvt.Ltd.) vs. DCIT in ITA No. 457/Bamg/2019 14 IT(IT)A Nos. 120 & 121/Bang/2022 Bangalore Narayan Das vii. ITAT Bangalore Tribunal in the case

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)

207 v. ITAT Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Arwa Hararwala v. ITO Ward-7(2)(2) in ITA No. 01/Bang/2020 vi. ITAT Banglore Tribunal in the case of Marlabs Innovations Pvt.Ltd. (sucdessor of Marlabs Software Pvt.Ltd.) vs. DCIT in ITA No. 457/Bamg/2019 14 IT(IT)A Nos. 120 & 121/Bang/2022 Bangalore Narayan Das vii. ITAT Bangalore Tribunal in the case

S R CONSTRUCTIONS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

207,180 5.204,610 8. A.Chakrapani 4.371,189 9.078,587 9. D.DharmaTeja 5,179,696 6.627,341 10. D.Avinashchowdary 8,184,117 15,566,291 11. Y.Mahaboobperan 1,812,340 7,494,566 Total 59,022,934 90,773,475 ITA Nos.636, 637/Bang/2025 ITA Nos.768, 769/Bang/2025 Page 38 of 60 Ans. Sir, I will be declaring the same

MUNIYAPPA MUNIRAJU ,BENGALURU vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Muniyappa Muniraju, Vs. Pr. Cit, No.1/3, 1St Cross, Muni Narasimhaiah Bangalore - 2. Garden, Chocolate Factory Main Road, Btm I Stage, Bangalore – 560 029, Karnataka. Pan : Anjpm 0458 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

207/-. Accordingly, Order passed by the AO is not erroneous and not prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. He further submitted that if the arguments of the assessee is not accepted it would change the opinion and would amount to double taxation to the assessee on the same income which is contrary to the provisions of income

M/S. PANJOS BUILDERS PVT LTD., ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2007-08

reassessment passed U/s 148 is on a mere change of opinion and is impermissible, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the learned assessing officer

S R CONSTRUCTIONS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

207,180\n5.204,610\n8.\nA.Chakrapani\n4.371,189\n9.078,587\n9.\nD.DharmaTeja\n5,179,696\n6.627,341\n10.\nD.Avinashchowdary\n8,184,117\n15,566,291\n11. Y.Mahaboobperan\n1,812,340\n7,494,566\nTotal\n59,022,934\n90,773,475\n\nAns. Sir, I will be declaring the same for the relevant F.Y. in the hands