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

reassess income in accordance with the provision of section 153A of the Act. Dated: 22-2-2013 (VED PARKASH KALIA)" From the aforesaid satisfaction note, it emerges that the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the documents containing the details of the cash receipts on sale of shop/offices at M/s. Super Mall, Karnal belonged to the other person - assessee - M/s. Super

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

reassess income in accordance with the provision of section 153A of the Act. Dated: 22-2-2013 (VED PARKASH KALIA)" From the aforesaid satisfaction note, it emerges that the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the documents containing the details of the cash receipts on sale of shop/offices at M/s. Super Mall, Karnal belonged to the other person - assessee - M/s. Super

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

546/-. In this regard, ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 29 questionnaire under section 142(1) fo the Act dated 24.01.2022 was communicated to the assessee stating that the manual return of income filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year under consideration is not valid and assessee was requested to file a valid return of income through

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

546/-. In this regard, ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 29 questionnaire under section 142(1) fo the Act dated 24.01.2022 was communicated to the assessee stating that the manual return of income filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year under consideration is not valid and assessee was requested to file a valid return of income through

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

546/-. In this regard, ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 29 questionnaire under section 142(1) fo the Act dated 24.01.2022 was communicated to the assessee stating that the manual return of income filed by the assessee for the Assessment Year under consideration is not valid and assessee was requested to file a valid return of income through

GMR TAMBARAM TINDIVANAM EXPRESSWAYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result that the revenue appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri. Jason P. Boaz

546, 1130 & 1131/Bang/2018 Page - 30 been allowed by the Legislature u/S.80-IA(4) of the Act and that is why the said Explanation restricting the deduction of Section 80-IA(4) of the Act only to the principal works contractor of development of infrastructure facility which included laying of additional lanes by road widening as clarified by CBDT, could not have

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

reassess the income of the appellant and consequently the notice issued under section 153A of the Act is invalid and the entire assessment proceedings is bad in law and void ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE , BANGALORE vs. M/S CONC SHADE CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD , CHIKKAMANGALUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessing income u/s.153C is that the AO has to be satisfied that the seized material in the course of search has a bearing on determination of the total income of the other person i.e., it should be incriminating in nature. 36. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the ITAT Kolkata Bench in the case of Trishul

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3),, BANGALORE vs. M/S CONC SHADE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD , CHIKKAMANGALUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessing income u/s.153C is that the AO has to be satisfied that the seized material in the course of search has a bearing on determination of the total income of the other person i.e., it should be incriminating in nature. 36. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the ITAT Kolkata Bench in the case of Trishul

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3) , BANGALORE vs. M/S CONC SHADE CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD , CHIKKAMANGALUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessing income u/s.153C is that the AO has to be satisfied that the seized material in the course of search has a bearing on determination of the total income of the other person i.e., it should be incriminating in nature. 36. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the ITAT Kolkata Bench in the case of Trishul

JUPITER CAPITAL P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

546 has held that the expenditure incurred towards purchase of shares is a capital expenditure and does not qualify for deduction u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. According to the AO, interest worked out at the rate of 12% per annum needs to be disallowed from being claimed as a revenue expenditure. The AO found that indirect

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

546 has held that the expenditure incurred towards purchase of shares is a capital expenditure and does not qualify for deduction u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. According to the AO, interest worked out at the rate of 12% per annum needs to be disallowed from being claimed as a revenue expenditure. The AO found that indirect

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

546 has held that the expenditure incurred towards purchase of shares is a capital expenditure and does not qualify for deduction u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. According to the AO, interest worked out at the rate of 12% per annum needs to be disallowed from being claimed as a revenue expenditure. The AO found that indirect