M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

seizure operation. The fetter imposed upon the Assessing Officer under Sections 147 and 148 of the Act have been removed by the non obstante clause under Section 153A of the Act. Consequently, we are of the opinion that in cases where the assessment or reassessment proceedings have already been completed and assessment orders have been passed, which were subsisting when

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

seizure, i.e., the income which cannot be detected in ordinary course of regular assessment. Thus, the foundation for making search assessments under sections 153A/153C can be said to be the existence of incriminating material showing undisclosed income detected as a result of search.” (Emphasis Added) 27. The Court emphasized that, in the absence of any incriminating materials that reasonably indicate

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

seizure, i.e., the income which cannot be detected in ordinary course of regular assessment. Thus, the foundation for making search assessments under sections 153A/153C can be said to be the existence of incriminating material showing undisclosed income detected as a result of search.” (Emphasis Added) 27. The Court emphasized that, in the absence of any incriminating materials that reasonably indicate

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

seizure, i.e., the income which cannot be detected in ordinary course of regular assessment. Thus, the foundation for making search assessments under sections 153A/153C can be said to be the existence of incriminating material showing undisclosed income detected as a result of search.” (Emphasis Added) 27. The Court emphasized that, in the absence of any incriminating materials that reasonably indicate

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

seizure would be the last panchnama\nin respect of the said premises. But for the purpose of limitation\nunder section 158BE, it would not be the last panchnama drawn in\nproof of conclusion of search, as defined in Explanation 2 to section\n158BE. For the purpose of limitation, there can be only one search\nand one panchnama.\n\n11.6

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

seizure would be the last panchnama\nin respect of the said premises. But for the purpose of limitation\nunder section 158BE, it would not be the last panchnama drawn in\nproof of conclusion of search, as defined in Explanation 2 to section\n158BE. For the purpose of limitation, there can be only one search\nand one panchnama.\n11.6 The learned

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

68,30,289/- which was spread over number of years as stated in the above table and offered in 153A return filed by the assessee and paid due taxes thereon. Therefore the entire additional grounds raised by the assessee regarding issue of notice under section 153A of the Act are not correct, since during the course of search and seizure

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

68,30,289/- which was spread over number of years as stated in the above table and offered in 153A return filed by the assessee and paid due taxes thereon. Therefore the entire additional grounds raised by the assessee regarding issue of notice under section 153A of the Act are not correct, since during the course of search and seizure

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

68,30,289/- which was spread over number of years as stated in the above table and offered in 153A return filed by the assessee and paid due taxes thereon. Therefore the entire additional grounds raised by the assessee regarding issue of notice under section 153A of the Act are not correct, since during the course of search and seizure

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

68,30,289/- which was spread over number of years as stated in the above table and offered in 153A return filed by the assessee and paid due taxes thereon. Therefore the entire additional grounds raised by the assessee regarding issue of notice under section 153A of the Act are not correct, since during the course of search and seizure

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

68,81,516/- Α.Υ. 2010-11 4 Disallowance of Purchases: e) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the assessing officer of Rs.45,53,51,501/- being purchases from unregistered dealers under the facts and circumstances of the case. 14,07,03,614/- f) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made

SRI. H. NAGARAJA,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Section 68 of the Act. In this case, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is not per se erroneous and further the CIT has not given any reasons to conclude that the order is erroneous. In fact, he directs the Assessing Officer to find out whether the order is erroneous by making further enquiry. This the decision

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

seizure of documents from the Appellant's premises if there was no search in the Appellant's case as all the seized documents allegedly belonged to -the Appellant alone and not to Mr Salian. ITA Nos.1117 to 1119/Bang/2022 Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore Page 6 of 131 g. holding that the defect, if any, of issuing notice under the inapplicable section

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

seizure of documents from the Appellant's premises if there was no search in the Appellant's case as all the seized documents allegedly belonged to -the Appellant alone and not to Mr Salian. ITA Nos.1117 to 1119/Bang/2022 Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore Page 6 of 131 g. holding that the defect, if any, of issuing notice under the inapplicable section

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

search because addition on account of alleged payment made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting and scribbling on loose sheets made by some person have no evidentiary value and is unsustainable and bad in law. 13.22 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. UOI [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) observed with regard to evidentiary

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

search because addition on account of alleged payment made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting and scribbling on loose sheets made by some person have no evidentiary value and is unsustainable and bad in law. 13.22 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. UOI [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) observed with regard to evidentiary

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

search because addition on account of alleged payment made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting and scribbling on loose sheets made by some person have no evidentiary value and is unsustainable and bad in law. 13.22 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. UOI [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) observed with regard to evidentiary

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

search because addition on account of alleged payment made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting and scribbling on loose sheets made by some person have no evidentiary value and is unsustainable and bad in law. 13.22 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. UOI [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) observed with regard to evidentiary