M/S VVD CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.3384/Bang/2018 is allowed, while ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed;" 3.2 The Pr.CIT without application of mind has mechanically approved the case for issue of notice u/s. 148 on the basis of the approval submitted u/s. 147(c). The Pr.CIT was not justified to accord the approval without fulfilling the conditions laid down u/s. 147

M/S VVD CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.3384/Bang/2018 is allowed, while ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed;" 3.2 The Pr.CIT without application of mind has mechanically approved the case for issue of notice u/s. 148 on the basis of the approval submitted u/s. 147(c). The Pr.CIT was not justified to accord the approval without fulfilling the conditions laid down u/s. 147

M/S VVD CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.3384/Bang/2018 is allowed, while ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed;" 3.2 The Pr.CIT without application of mind has mechanically approved the case for issue of notice u/s. 148 on the basis of the approval submitted u/s. 147(c). The Pr.CIT was not justified to accord the approval without fulfilling the conditions laid down u/s. 147

M/S VVD CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.3384/Bang/2018 is allowed, while ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed;" 3.2 The Pr.CIT without application of mind has mechanically approved the case for issue of notice u/s. 148 on the basis of the approval submitted u/s. 147(c). The Pr.CIT was not justified to accord the approval without fulfilling the conditions laid down u/s. 147

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2)(3), BANGALORE vs. SRI MADE GOWDA THIBBE GOWDA, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2008-09

u/s. 147 depends upon the issuance of a valid notice. If the notice issued by him is invalid for any reason the entire proceedings taken by him would become void for want of jurisdiction.” & CO No.51/Bang/2019 Page 26 of 38 42. The Tribunal in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Radheshyam Mohanlal Maheshwari [2011] 12 ITR(TRIB.) 429 (AHD.) held

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

u/s. 147 depends upon the issuance of a valid notice. If the notice issued by him is invalid for any reason the entire proceedings taken by him would become void for want of jurisdiction.” 37. The Tribunal in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Radheshyam Mohanlal Maheshwari [2011] 12 ITR(TRIB.) 429 (AHD.) held as under:- ITA Nos. 46 & 47/Bang/2021

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

u/s. 147 depends upon the issuance of a valid notice. If the notice issued by him is invalid for any reason the entire proceedings taken by him would become void for want of jurisdiction.” 37. The Tribunal in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Radheshyam Mohanlal Maheshwari [2011] 12 ITR(TRIB.) 429 (AHD.) held as under:- ITA Nos. 46 & 47/Bang/2021

LOKESH TALANKI ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course

M/S NXP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2009-10

depreciation amounting to Rs.22,31,232. (ii) TP adjustments amounting to Rs.281,131,440 pursuant to the order of TPO dated 11.1.2013. 7. Since the AO passed the impugned assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 254 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) in his ex parte dismissed all the grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI SACHIN KAMATH, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed” Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 3148. 4[(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve 5 on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, 6[* * *] as may be specified in the notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI SACHIN KAMATH , BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed” Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 3148. 4[(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve 5 on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, 6[* * *] as may be specified in the notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI SACHIN KAMATH, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed” Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 3148. 4[(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve 5 on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, 6[* * *] as may be specified in the notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI SACHIN KAMATH , BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed” Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 3148. 4[(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve 5 on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, 6[* * *] as may be specified in the notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI SACHIN KAMATH, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed” Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 3148. 4[(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve 5 on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, 6[* * *] as may be specified in the notice

THAYAPPA BALAKRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Thayappa Balakrishna, No. 987, 11Th Main, The Principal 1St Block, Commissioner Of 3Rd Stage, Income-Tax, Basaveshwaranagar, Bengaluru – 1. Vs. Bangalore – 560 079. Pan: Abdpb4893N Appellant Respondent : Shri Ravi Shankar .S.V, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr

u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the act, the scope of verification cannot exceed the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. The Ld.PCIT in the present facts proceeded to enquire on an issue which is not covered under the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. It would have been different situation if the 263 was initiated against the original assessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(2), BANGALORE vs. MR. M R SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

u/s. 147 of the Act as against 153C since the Ld.AO reopened the assessment based on materials seized during a search. Before we proceed with the analysing applicability of section 148 vis-à-vis 153C it is necessary to extract the relevant context. "Assessment of income of any other person. - 153C. [(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147

M/S JINDAL ALUMINIUM LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2005-06

reassessment proceedings. The Court is Page 16 of 19 only concerned with the preliminary stage of recording reasons and issuing notice to reopen the assessment. The materials available before the Assessing Officer were wholly relevant for the formation of the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment on account of the failure of the assessee-company to furnish

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI C GANGADHARA MURTHY , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 143(3) of the Act as per the return filed by the assessee under Section 139 of the Act. Similar issue has been decided by the coordinate Bench of the ITAT Lucknow reported in the case of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kanpur (2009) 32 SOT 80 (Lucknow). After going through this judgement

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the COs by assessee in CO

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

u/s 14A of the Act, which was not the reason for assessment at all as such, reopening therefore is not sustainable. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways 331 ITR 230. However, we find that there is a binding decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case