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

reassessment proceedings. IT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024 IBM Canada Limited & Others Page 31 of 56 Observation of the CIT(A) Rebuttal to the CIT(A)’s observations - Reference to Explanation 3 to section not file a return under section 139 of the 271(1)(c) of the Act was upheld Act 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

reassessment proceedings. IT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 & IT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024 IBM Canada Limited & Others Page 31 of 56 Observation of the CIT(A) Rebuttal to the CIT(A)’s observations - Reference to Explanation 3 to section not file a return under section 139 of the 271(1)(c) of the Act was upheld Act basis

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessment proceedings. - Reference to Explanation 3 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was upheld (Page 10/11 of the CIT(A)'s order) - The CIT(A) has contended that mere acceptance of tax liability will not preclude the levy of the penalty on the assessee. - The CIT(A) has relied on the ruling of the Supreme Court

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

reassessment proceedings. Reference to Explanation 3 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was upheld (Page 10/11 of the CIT(A)'s order) In addition to the above, legal submissions, it is submitted that IBM India has reported such receipts in 3CEB Explanation 3 refers to the term 'reasonable cause'. Reliance can be placed on decision

SRI. GANGASHARA SHETTY, ,DAKSHINA KANNADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2017-18

reassessment proceedings. Therefore, it is a case where a claim has been made in an open and bonafide manner and hence in terms of provisions of section 273B

SRI. PANATI VIKRAMDEVA REDDY,,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 273B. Thereafter relying on the following judgments the AO imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act by order dated 15.9.222 for non-compliance of notices u/s. 142(1) dated 12.11.2021, 16.12.2021 and 11.1.2022:- • Jaysons Infrastructures India Private Limited vs ITO [TS-5873- ITAT-2017( BANGALORE]-O • Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs DCIT[2017] 84 txmann.com51 (Mumbai- Trib

SRI. PANATI VIKRAMDEVA REDDY,,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 273B. Thereafter relying on the following judgments the AO imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act by order dated 15.9.222 for non-compliance of notices u/s. 142(1) dated 12.11.2021, 16.12.2021 and 11.1.2022:- • Jaysons Infrastructures India Private Limited vs ITO [TS-5873- ITAT-2017( BANGALORE]-O • Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs DCIT[2017] 84 txmann.com51 (Mumbai- Trib

M/S HUBLI DHARWAD STOCK TRADING HOUSE ,HUBLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), HUBLI

In the result, the assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 1997-98,

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jason P Boaz

reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act, inter alia, for the six assessment years under consideration in these appeals, and notices under Section 148 were issued to the assessee on 4.7.2008 requiring it to file returns of income for these years. The assessee did not file returns of income for these assessment years in response to the notices issued