BASAVA ROAWAYS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,SEDAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GULBARGA, GULBARGA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

Section Amount (Rs.) Ultratech Cement 194C 12,41,23,184 Vasavadatta Cement 194C 5,68,01,670 . ITA No.565 /Bang/2025 Page 3 of 16 Total 18,09,24,854 6. Considering the above receipts of Rs. 18,09,24,854 reflected in Form 26AS, the AO proceeded to estimate the income of the assessee by applying a profit rate

M H SUDHARSHAN REDDY ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri M H Sudharshan Reddy, 20, 1St H Cross, 8Th Main, S S Layout, Shardha Colony, Basaveshwaranagar, Bangalore-560 079 ….Appellant. Pan Alips 3131M Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6(2)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri R. Chandrashekar, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Priyadarshi Misra, Jcit (D.R.)

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : 2 3 3. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a real estate agent engaged in formation and sale of sites, and filed the return of income for the AsstYear

M/S SYNDICATE BANK,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, UDUPI

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under Section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April 2001. 9. From perusal of Section 14A of the Act, it is evident that for the purposes of computing

PERFECT ROOFING,HASSAN vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, HASSAN

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

194C which is 30% of Rs.69,656. Accordingly total income was assessed at Rs.63,27,377 in the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144(b) of the Act. 3. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) issued two notices on 05.02.2024 and 19.02.204 fixing hearing on 20.02.24 and 26.02.2024 and ex parte order was passed on 27.02.2024 dismissing the appeal for non- prosecution

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise .increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154 for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. 6.2.4 Accordingly, it was proposed to the assessee that the disallowance u/s 14A will be made by invoking

MUNIYAPPA MUNIRAJU ,BENGALURU vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Muniyappa Muniraju, Vs. Pr. Cit, No.1/3, 1St Cross, Muni Narasimhaiah Bangalore - 2. Garden, Chocolate Factory Main Road, Btm I Stage, Bangalore – 560 029, Karnataka. Pan : Anjpm 0458 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

194C of the Act however it has been deducted under section 194H of the Act under the head commission which is completely wrong. The learned Counsel further referred to Paper Book Page No. 22 which is submission made before AO in which it has been clarified that Rs.12 lakhs is included in the turnover of Rs.24,50,000/- and assessee

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES P. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

u/s. 131 of the Act was also issued to the managing director in response to which the assessee furnished the written submission which was considered by the ld.AO and accordingly the issue was decided. The ld.AO was of the view that in several cases there was no revenue recognition in subsequent year and the opening balances have been carried forward

HEWLETT PAKCARD INDIA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

u/s. 131 of the Act was also issued to the managing director in response to which the assessee furnished the written submission which was considered by the ld.AO and accordingly the issue was decided. The ld.AO was of the view that in several cases there was no revenue recognition in subsequent year and the opening balances have been carried forward