ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S KANSUR DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD. , BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

250(4). The result of enquiry conducted by him could either go to further cement the case made out by the Assessing Officer or to help out the assessee against the findings of the Assessing Officer. The mere fact that the results of the enquiries thus conducted supported the case of the assessee and not that of the revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S SNOWSHINE REALTORS PVT.LTD. , BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

250(4). The result of enquiry conducted by him could either go to further cement the case made out by the Assessing Officer or to help out the assessee against the findings of the Assessing Officer. The mere fact that the results of the enquiries thus conducted supported the case of the assessee and not that of the revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1-(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S KANSUR DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD., BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

250(4). The result of enquiry conducted by him could either go to further cement the case made out by the Assessing Officer or to help out the assessee against the findings of the Assessing Officer. The mere fact that the results of the enquiries thus conducted supported the case of the assessee and not that of the revenue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HUBBALLI vs. M/S. KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEEN BANK LIMITED, DHARWAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

250 of the Act dated 19/03/2020 in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant's case. 2. The Appellant denies itself Liable to be taxed over and above the total business toss of Rs. 363,82,18,993/- declared by the appellant

M/S KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEENA BANK,DHARWAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HUBBALLI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

250 of the Act dated 19/03/2020 in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the Appellant's case. 2. The Appellant denies itself Liable to be taxed over and above the total business toss of Rs. 363,82,18,993/- declared by the appellant

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

4) of the Act was recorded of the directors,\ntrustees and key employees of the finance department. The search\noperation showed that there are evidence relating to violation with\nrespect to the diversion of trust funds to the trustees for purchase of\nland in their individual capacity and advances to related entities.\nThere was bogus expenditure debited by the trust

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

section\n12AB(4) of Income Tax Act.\n3.0\nIn the case an action u/s 132(search) was concluded on 23/06/2022\nITA Nos.2106 to 2109/Bang/2024\nPage 23 of 81\nand during the search the evidence unearthed have revealed the\noccurrence of following specified violations;\n3.1\n(i) Diversion of trust funds to trustees for purchase of lands in their\nindividual

BHUWALKA SALES CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. A. No.1436/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S. Bhuwalka Sales Corporation, No.5, Walker Lane, Bhuwalka Landmark, Langford Road, Richmond Town, Bangalore-560 025 …. Appellant. Pan Aaifb 0063G Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri K. Seshadri, C.A. Respondent By : Shri P. Dhivahar, Jcit (D.R). Date Of Hearing : 2.2.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 1.4.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Bangalore Dt.12.8.2013 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :- 2.1 The Assessee, In The Business Of Trading In Rolled Products, Filed The Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2009-10 On 26.9.2009 Declaring Income Of Rs.49,25,026. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short 'The Act') & The Case Was Taken Up For Scrutiny. The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide

4 3.2.2 The learned Authorised Representative further submitted that the learned CIT (Appeals) was wrong in invoking section 68 of the Act with respect to the credit of Rs.1.25 Crores appearing in the assessee's balance sheet as on 31.7.2009. The learned Authorised Representative contends that the identity and existence of the creditor i.e. M/s. Deccan Alloys

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

68 days. (iii) Based on the material found from Samsung C–9 Pro mobile of Ms Parul kansaria during search proceedings confirmed in ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 40 statement u/s 132(4) where in answer to Q.No. 51 dated 9/8/2019, she agreed that unaccounted cash sales of around ₹ 1.88 crores were made. (iv) Ms Kansaria also agreed

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3) , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

68 days. (iii) Based on the material found from Samsung C–9 Pro mobile of Ms Parul kansaria during search proceedings confirmed in ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 40 statement u/s 132(4) where in answer to Q.No. 51 dated 9/8/2019, she agreed that unaccounted cash sales of around ₹ 1.88 crores were made. (iv) Ms Kansaria also agreed

LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3) , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

68 days. (iii) Based on the material found from Samsung C–9 Pro mobile of Ms Parul kansaria during search proceedings confirmed in ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 40 statement u/s 132(4) where in answer to Q.No. 51 dated 9/8/2019, she agreed that unaccounted cash sales of around ₹ 1.88 crores were made. (iv) Ms Kansaria also agreed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BAENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD(LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

68 days. (iii) Based on the material found from Samsung C–9 Pro mobile of Ms Parul kansaria during search proceedings confirmed in ITA Nos.410-412-169-170- CO 6/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 40 statement u/s 132(4) where in answer to Q.No. 51 dated 9/8/2019, she agreed that unaccounted cash sales of around ₹ 1.88 crores were made. (iv) Ms Kansaria also agreed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI MAHABIR PRASAD (LEGAL HEIR MS. PARUL KANSARIA), BENGALURU

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

68 days.\n(iii)\nBased on the material found from Samsung C−9 Pro mobile of\nMs Parul kansaria during search proceedings confirmed in\nPage 5 of 40\nITA Nos.410-412-169-170-\nCO 6/Bang/2024\nstatement u/s 132(4) where in answer to Q.No. 51 dated\n9/8/2019, she agreed that unaccounted cash sales of around ₹\n1.88 crores were made.\n(iv)\nMs Kansaria

VISHWANATHAREDDY CHENNAREDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(7), BENGALURU

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

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") insofar it is against the Appellant, is opposed to the law, weight of evidence, facts and circumstance of the Appellant's case. 2. The order is passed against the principle of natural justice and thus, liable to be quashed, 3. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred partly by upholding the cash deposits

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

section\n12AB(4) of Income Tax Act.\n3.0 In the case an action u/s 132(search) was concluded on 23/06/2022\nPage 22 of 81\nITA Nos.2106 to 2109/Bang/2024\nand during the search the evidence unearthed have revealed the\noccurrence of following specified violations;\n(i) Diversion of trust funds to trustees for purchase of lands in their\nindividual capacity

ARJUN SHETTY,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TPS, CIRCLE - 1(1), MANGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Arjun Shetty, Vs. Ito, 16-6-393/9 Shubha Krishna Building, Ward – Tps, Highland Falnir, Mangalore - 575002. Circle – 1(1), Pan :Ainps5294H Mangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Nilanjan Dey,Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025

250 of the Act dated 13.11.2024 to the extent which is against him, has filed this present appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal by raising several grounds. 15. The core issue in this appeal is that whether the CIT(A) was justified in affirming the action of the learned AO in making an addition under section 68

SHRI. SHANTHISAGAR CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

250 of the Act dated 21.08.2025 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised extensive grounds of appeal numbered as Ground No. 1 to 17 running into multiple pages. Hence, we are not inclined to reproduce the same here for the sake of brevity and convenience. ITA No.2081 /Bang/2025 Page 2 of 32 3. The Ground

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

250 of the Act, both dated 19.10.2023. 2. First, we will take up the quantum appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.837/Bang/2023. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. “The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances