SHRI. BANGALORE NARAYAN DAS,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 & 2017-18 stands allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 120 & 121/Bang/2022 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18)

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act on the facts and circumstance of the case. 8. The appellant craves for leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute any or all of the above grounds of appeal as may be necessary at the time of hearing. 9. For these and other grounds that

MR. MOHAMMED HANIF MOHAMMED YUSUF DHARWADKAR,HUBLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HUBLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

section 234A and 234B and 234C of the Act. 8. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed. Total tax effect Rs.2,08,12,152/- 2. The registry has noted that there was a delay of 74 in filing the appeal

DINESH KUMAR SINGHI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

section 132(4) of the Act. No specific request for cross examination was made by the assessee. xvi. The quarterly and annual performance report submitted to SEZ the assessee declared that the unit has commenced production from the EOU only since 30/5/2006. From the about is clear that EOU was not established till 30/5/2006 and not entitled for deduction

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

234A(3), 234B(3), 234B and 234C of the Act and further the computation of interest was not provided to the appellant as regard to the rate, period and method of calculation of interest ITA Nos. 1619 to 1623/Bang/2018 Page 9 of 26 under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant expressly urges that the period of levy

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

234A(3), 234B(3), 234B and 234C of the Act and further the computation of interest was not provided to the appellant as regard to the rate, period and method of calculation of interest ITA Nos. 1619 to 1623/Bang/2018 Page 9 of 26 under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant expressly urges that the period of levy

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

234A(3), 234B(3), 234B and 234C of the Act and further the computation of interest was not provided to the appellant as regard to the rate, period and method of calculation of interest ITA Nos. 1619 to 1623/Bang/2018 Page 9 of 26 under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant expressly urges that the period of levy

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

234A(3), 234B(3), 234B and 234C of the Act and further the computation of interest was not provided to the appellant as regard to the rate, period and method of calculation of interest ITA Nos. 1619 to 1623/Bang/2018 Page 9 of 26 under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant expressly urges that the period of levy

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

234A(3), 234B(3), 234B and 234C of the Act and further the computation of interest was not provided to the appellant as regard to the rate, period and method of calculation of interest ITA Nos. 1619 to 1623/Bang/2018 Page 9 of 26 under the facts and circumstances of the case. The appellant expressly urges that the period of levy

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. 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. 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. 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

68.” 20 of page 24 ITA No.405/Bang/2023 S.P No.29/Bang/2023 N. As regards, without prejudice to the above, the learned AO has erred in holding that the appellant has failed to respond to the notice u/s 148 dated 30.06.2021 where the return of income was duly submitted. The delay in filing the return was due to the technical issues

TOYOTA BOSHOKU AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BIDADI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OR THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 7(1)(1), KORAMANGALA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

234A and 234B is consequential in nature and dependent on the outcome of the assessment which is under appeal. Hence, this ground is also dismissed as infructuous. 4. The issue raised in Ground No. 31 pertains to the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Income Tax Act. As this matter is premature at this stage

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

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the assessing officer. Without prejudice, the rate, period and on what quantum the interest has been levied are not in accordance with law and are not discernible from the order and hence deserves

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

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the assessing officer. Without prejudice, the rate, period and on what quantum the interest has been levied are not in accordance with law and are not discernible from the order and hence deserves

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

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the assessing officer. Without prejudice, the rate, period and on what quantum the interest has been levied are not in accordance with law and are not discernible from the order and hence deserves

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. K.R. VENKATESH GOWDA/S, BANGALORE

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2004-05, 2006-07 and 2007-08 and the Revenue’s cross appeals for Assessment

Bench: Us. Revenue’S Cross Appeals For Assessment Year 2003-04 & 2007-08 Are Also Up For Consideration Before Us.

3. qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajit Jain, reported in 260 R 80. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. K.R. VENKATESH GOWDA/S, BANGALORE

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2004-05, 2006-07 and 2007-08 and the Revenue’s cross appeals for Assessment

Bench: Us. Revenue’S Cross Appeals For Assessment Year 2003-04 & 2007-08 Are Also Up For Consideration Before Us.

3. qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajit Jain, reported in 260 R 80. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case

M/S K.R. VENKATESH GOWDA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2004-05, 2006-07 and 2007-08 and the Revenue’s cross appeals for Assessment

Bench: Us. Revenue’S Cross Appeals For Assessment Year 2003-04 & 2007-08 Are Also Up For Consideration Before Us.

3. qua non for making a valid assessment under section 153A of the Act on the parity of the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajit Jain, reported in 260 R 80. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case