DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SHRI. SUMIR J HINDUJA, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

2(22)(e) or otherwise and the same has been dealt separately in the order. I, therefore, hold that the AO had sufficient reason to believe that the income of the appellant had escaped assessment and he was justified in taking action taken by him u/s 147 of the Act to reopen the appellant's assessment for the assessment year

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SHRI. JAGADISH N HINDUJA, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

2(22)(e) or otherwise and the same has been dealt separately in the order. I, therefore, hold that the AO had sufficient reason to believe that the income of the appellant had escaped assessment and he was justified in taking action taken by him u/s 147 of the Act to reopen the appellant's assessment for the assessment year

SUNITA MADHOK ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessment proceedings because the Assessing Officer failed to make out a case within the four corners of the provisions of section 147 of the Income-tax Act.” 69. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. SPL'S Siddhartha Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 223 (DELHI) held as under:- “8. Thus, if authority is given expressly

SUNITA MADHOK ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessment proceedings because the Assessing Officer failed to make out a case within the four corners of the provisions of section 147 of the Income-tax Act.” 69. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. SPL'S Siddhartha Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 223 (DELHI) held as under:- “8. Thus, if authority is given expressly

SMT.VIDYA DEVI LADHANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

22)(e) cannot be made in the reassessment as there was no incriminating material the assessees. 8. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative has submitted that Section 153A permits assessment or reassessment of the total income and it is open to the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess any income during the course of assessment under Section 153A

INTACT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the consolidated order of the ld. CIT(A)-11, Bengaluru, dated 10.02.2025 vide DIN : ITBA/APL/M/250/2024- 25/1073061567(1) for the AY 2015-16; vide DIN: ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1073061747(1) for the AY 2016-17 and vide DIN : ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1073061874(1) for the AY 2017-18 passed

INTACT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the consolidated order of the ld. CIT(A)-11, Bengaluru, dated 10.02.2025 vide DIN : ITBA/APL/M/250/2024- 25/1073061567(1) for the AY 2015-16; vide DIN: ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1073061747(1) for the AY 2016-17 and vide DIN : ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1073061874(1) for the AY 2017-18 passed

SRI. KEMPANNA (HUF - DISRUPTED),BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year : 2006-07

E R Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member This appeal is filed by the assessee and the same is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-4, Bangalore dated 30.12.2015 for Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee as per concise grounds of appeal are as under. “During the course of hearing on 23/07/2018

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These two appeals by the assessee are directed against different orders of CIT(Appeals) for AYs 2002-03 & 2003-04. The grounds are common in both the appeals and only change in figures, which read as follows:- AY 2002-03 “1. The CIT(A) erred both in Law and on the Facts

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These two appeals by the assessee are directed against different orders of CIT(Appeals) for AYs 2002-03 & 2003-04. The grounds are common in both the appeals and only change in figures, which read as follows:- AY 2002-03 “1. The CIT(A) erred both in Law and on the Facts

SHRI.J M VRUSHABENDRAIAH ,HOSPET vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

2 of the assessment order the extract from the appraisal report prepared by the DDIT (Investigation) wherein it is recorded that information relating to the Assessee was found in the spreadsheet (excel sheet) that was stored in the hard disk of Sri Ali Khan. c) It is submitted that the learned Assessing Officer is not justified in initiating the proceedings

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. The facts of the case are that the original assessment in these assessment years was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. The facts of the case are that the original assessment in these assessment years was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. The facts of the case are that the original assessment in these assessment years was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. The facts of the case are that the original assessment in these assessment years was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 24.10.2018 of the CIT(Appeals)-7, Bengaluru for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. The facts of the case are that the original assessment in these assessment years was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

SRI RAJESH KUMAR,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2005-06

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned Page 10 of 18 under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— (a) issue notice to such person requiring

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

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

22-8-\n2008 which comes under the assessment year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer\nreopened the assessment year 2008-09, which is falling within those six assessment\nyears immediately preceding the assessment year in which search is conducted. The\nassessee case falls within the provisions of section 153C, as the incriminating document\nseized in the case of search in another

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

E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member The appeal by the revenue and cross objection by the assessee are directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-13, Bengaluru, dated 9.10.2018 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds:- “1. The order of the learned CIT(A) is opposed to law and facts