M/S SHETTY CONSTRUCTIONS ,KALABURAGI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-(1), KALABURAGI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodiaita No.286(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Shetty Constructions, Shetty Enclave, Aland Road, Kalaburagi-585 103 Panno.Aaffs1811G Appellant Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-(1), Kalaburagi Respondent Appellant By : Shri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manjeet Singh, Addl.Cit

reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in section 69 or section 69B

M/S. PUTTUR CITY HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,PUTTUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PUTTUR

In the result, (i) ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in section 69 or section 69B

M/S. PUTTUR CITY HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,PUTTUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PUTTUR

In the result, (i) ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in section 69 or section 69B

M/S. PUTTUR CITY HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,PUTTUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PUTTUR

In the result, (i) ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in section 69 or section 69B

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

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 & 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

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

GOPAL S. PANDITH vs. DCIT,

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

reassessed. In the accepted the credit in the name of Mr. Sunil Patil of Rs.42 lakhs and there is no evidence or seized material found during the search to support the undisclosed income. However from the record produced before us, we find that the assessee has filed a return of income on 3.2.2010 along with the Balance Sheet wherein this

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassess income of such “other person” in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. 4.5 In the present case, the ld. AO being Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-1, Mangalore having recorded the satisfaction for proceedings u/s 153C of the Act after duly recording the satisfaction as follows: “A search was initiated under section

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassess income of such “other person” in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. 4.5 In the present case, the ld. AO being Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-1, Mangalore having recorded the satisfaction for proceedings u/s 153C of the Act after duly recording the satisfaction as follows: “A search was initiated under section

KUMARSWAMY GANGASHARAISH KALLUR ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2014-15

reassessment order is beyond his jurisdiction. The provision of section 44AB of the Act are not applicable to the fictional provisions like section 68, 69, 69A, 69B

SRI. M. NAGARAJA,MYSORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1), MYSORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 1999-2000

reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in section 69 or section 69B

BIJU PAPPACHAN,KERALA vs. AO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

reassessment order passed by the AO, we take note of the fact that the assessee is retired Defence personnel and received pension and post retirements benefits during the year under consideration. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act to the SBI as well as to Air Force as the assessee

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

69B, 69C or 69D of the Act. xxi. The CIT(A) also grossly erred in not taking note of the fact that if these amounts were really the income of the appellant, there must have been assets to represent these corresponding incomes which ought to have been unearthed in the course of search proceedings. xxii. The very fact that there

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

69B r.w.s.115BBE of the Act) Interest advances to Om Sai 2013-14 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based on material already on record is bad in law Rs.1,41,90,000/- 2014-15 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based on material already on record is bad in law Rs.5,52,05,000/- Rs.36,00,000/- 2015-16 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

69B r.w.s.115BBE of the Act) Interest advances to Om Sai 2013-14 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based on material already on record is bad in law Rs.1,41,90,000/- 2014-15 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based on material already on record is bad in law Rs.5,52,05,000/- Rs.36,00,000/- 2015-16 Initiation of reassessment proceedings based