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.

section 23 are now well-settled and if the value returned is not in accordance with such principles, it is open to the assessee to contend that the value as may be determined upon correct application of the law should form the basis of assessment. The revenue authorities, in our view, cannot be heard to say that merely because

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

section 153A of the Act on the basis of seized materials found in the form of bogus revenue expenditure claimed and assessee filed return of income and total declaration was made of Rs.6,68

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

section 153A of the Act on the basis of seized materials found in the form of bogus revenue expenditure claimed and assessee filed return of income and total declaration was made of Rs.6,68

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

section 153A of the Act on the basis of seized materials found in the form of bogus revenue expenditure claimed and assessee filed return of income and total declaration was made of Rs.6,68

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

section 153A of the Act on the basis of seized materials found in the form of bogus revenue expenditure claimed and assessee filed return of income and total declaration was made of Rs.6,68

SHRI M. THIMMEGOWDA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153A ITA Nos.1035 & 1036/Bang/2019 Page 21 of 78 of the Act is valid. The grounds and additional grounds raised in this regard by the assessee are dismissed. A.Y. 2006-07 & 2007-08: Facts are similar in both A.Ys. We consider the facts in AY 2007-08. On merits, the ground raised by the assessee is that the 13. CIT(Appeals

SHRI M. THIMMEGOWDA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153A ITA Nos.1035 & 1036/Bang/2019 Page 21 of 78 of the Act is valid. The grounds and additional grounds raised in this regard by the assessee are dismissed. A.Y. 2006-07 & 2007-08: Facts are similar in both A.Ys. We consider the facts in AY 2007-08. On merits, the ground raised by the assessee is that the 13. CIT(Appeals

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

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

153A of the Act, assessee filed return on 30.03.2019 and declared income as stated in the above table. Thereafter, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.03.2019. Subsequently, other statutory notices were issued to the assessee. During the course of search proceedings in the office premises of BNHL(assessee) evidences with regard

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

153A in these assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 is justified. This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 56. The next common ground for the AYs 2009-10 to 2012-13 is whether the status of assessee is resident or non-resident. The AO has held that the assessee is a resident on the following grounds:- “Some pages

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

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

153A of the Act, assessee filed return on 30.03.2019 and declared income as stated in the above table. Thereafter, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.03.2019. Subsequently, other statutory notices were issued to the assessee. During the course of search proceedings in the office premises of BNHL(assessee) evidences with regard

GOPAL S. PANDITH vs. DCIT,

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

153A of the Act, since the learned Assessing Authority has considered the income returned in the original return. 6. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the adoption of income under head "POOJA" Rs.20,00,000/- as against Rs.3,85,376/- admitted by appellant, rejecting the appellant's contention that the offer is Gross receipt

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.28.3.2013, wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.7,49,56,900 in view of an addition of Rs.1,83,50,000 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68