KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result the ITA No

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained ITA Nos.1617 and 1618/Bang/2024 Page 25 of 45 for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here in the present case

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here in the present case

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here in the present case

M/S. H & F GAMES PVT. LTD.,BELLANDUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 & AY 2014-15

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

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording Page 10 of 11 the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here

M/S. H & F GAMES PVT. LTD.,BELLANDUR, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 & AY 2014-15

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

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording Page 10 of 11 the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no ITA Nos.1568 to 1570 & 1573 to 1575/Bang/2024 Page 9 of 16 explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no ITA Nos.1568 to 1570 & 1573 to 1575/Bang/2024 Page 9 of 16 explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no ITA Nos.1568 to 1570 & 1573 to 1575/Bang/2024 Page 9 of 16 explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no ITA Nos.1568 to 1570 & 1573 to 1575/Bang/2024 Page 9 of 16 explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here in the present case

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 68 is any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here in the present case

KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

section 68 of the Act:- "68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. The assessing officer is very much sure while recording the reasons for reopening that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts. Here

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

68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit is clearly not based on any incriminating material seized from the assessee. 3.4.3 In this context, the jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT Vs. Lancy Constructions in ITA No.528 to 531/2014 has held as under :- “ 4.2.2 In this regard, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

KLENE PAKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

68 of the Act. 4. The relevant facts are that the assessee is a public company and engaged in the business of manufacturing of HDPE Bags. The assessee company was subject to search proceedings under section 132 of the Act as on 12th June 2014. Inconsequence to the search, a notice under section 153A

KLENE PAKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

68 of the Act. 4. The relevant facts are that the assessee is a public company and engaged in the business of manufacturing of HDPE Bags. The assessee company was subject to search proceedings under section 132 of the Act as on 12th June 2014. Inconsequence to the search, a notice under section 153A

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

68,805 5 2014-2015 3,39,72,356 6 2015-2016 4,03,73,597 Total 15,10,05,646 14.1 She submitted that the assessee company has offered a sum of Rs.2,23,19,384/- in its return of income as admitted during the search. From above it is clear case of concealment of income by the assessee

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 292B of the Act lacks merit as the plain language of the said Section makes it abundantly clear that this provision condones the invalidity which may arise merely by mistake, defect or omission in notice. The said Section reads as under: - 292-B. Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds.—No return