DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

u/s 147 under the facts &\ncircumstances of the case renders the very initiation bad in law and the entire\nproceeding is'void ab initio.\n9.\nIn this context, the relevant portions of section 153C is reproduced as under:-\n'Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

reassessment notices issued on or after 01stApril 2021 are deemed to be notice issued u/s 148A of the amended Act and should be governed by the substituted sections of 147 to 151

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

u/s 147 under the facts &\ncircumstances of the case renders the very initiation bad in law and the entire\nproceeding is'void ab initio.\n9. In this context, the relevant portions of section 153C is reproduced as under:-\n'Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

u/s 147 under the facts &\ncircumstances of the case renders the very initiation bad in law and the entire\nproceeding is'void ab initio.\n9.\nIn this context, the relevant portions of section 153C is reproduced as under:-\n'Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer

RAHUL MEKA ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1(2) , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 151 (ii) of the Act. Hence, they are required to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the consequential reassessment order dated 8.3.2024 passed u/s 147

AKSHAY KUMAR RUNGTA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

u/s 1530 of the Ate. The provisionof section 153C of the Act is reproduced below: Assessment of income of any other person. 153C.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section. 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized

DANDU JOJAPPA FRANCIS,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(3), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2016-17

reassessment notice. Section 151 of the new regime does not prescribe a time limit within which a specified authority has to grant sanction. Rather, it links up the time limits with the jurisdiction of the authority to grant sanction. Section 151(ii) of the new regime prescribes a higher level of authority if more than three years have elapsed from

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

u/s 153A of the Act. Now we take provisions of section 153A of the Act, which reads as follows:- “153A. Assessment in case of search or requisition. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

u/s 153A of the Act. Now we take provisions of section 153A of the Act, which reads as follows:- “153A. Assessment in case of search or requisition. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, 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

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148.] 34[Explanation 4.—For the removal of doubts

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU 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

147 there is reason to believe for\nescapement of income only. Accordingly we hold that the issuance of notive u/s\n148 is justified, relying on the judgment of Hn'ble Apex Court in the case of\nPCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023) 149 taxmann.com\n399 (SC). Therefore, we rejecte the arguments of the learned Counsel rearding\ninitiation of proceedings

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in above\nterms

147 there is reason to believe for\nescapement of income only. Accordingly we hold that the issuance of notive u/s\n148 is justified, relying on the judgment of Hn'ble Apex Court in the case of\nPCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023) 149 taxmann.com\n399 (SC). Therefore, we rejecte the arguments of the learned Counsel rearding\ninitiation of proceedings

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

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned "belongs or belong to" a person other than the person referred to in section 153-A, then, the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned

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

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned "belongs or belong to" a person other than the person referred to in section 153-A, then, the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned

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

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned "belongs or belong to" a person other than the person referred to in section 153-A, then, the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned

KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result the ITA No

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

151 of the Act. The copy ofreasons were provided to the assessee. He further submitted that in respect of the assessement, should have been made under section 153C the Act instead of section 147 of the Act. The learned DR stated that prima facie at the time of issue of notice under sections 147/148 of the Act, the AO must

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

u/s 132 of the Act has been amended w.e.f. 1.6.2023. and in such search cases assessment shall be completed as per the provision of section 153A of the Act. The section 153A reads as under: “153A. Assessment in case of search or requisition – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

u/s 132 of the Act has been amended w.e.f. 1.6.2023. and in such search cases assessment shall be completed as per the provision of section 153A of the Act. The section 153A reads as under: “153A. Assessment in case of search or requisition – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section