AMRUTHA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,SANJAYANAGAR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2) , BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

transferred to certain other entities on the instruction of the assessee. Later, he submitted an affidavit where he stated that work was genuinely carried out for the assessee. The Revenue has not brought any tangible material to discredit this affidavit. In fact, the affidavit was dismissed without proper reasoning. 30.3 Additionally, we note that the assessee has demanded cross- examination

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

133A\non SCDCC Bank, wherein certain documents were found\nand seized. Based on the said documents, it was detected\nthat the Assessee has received a cash component on sale\nof its Projects viz., Micasa, Ventura, Primero and Padavu,\nwhich has escaped the assessment. Accordingly, the case\nwas reopened under section 147 and notice under section\n148 was issued

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

133A\non SCDCC Bank, wherein certain documents were found\nand seized. Based on the said documents, it was detected\nthat the Assessee has received a cash component on sale\nof its Projects viz., Micasa, Ventura, Primero and Padavu,\nwhich has escaped the assessment. Accordingly, the\ncase was reopened under section 147 and notice under section\n148 was issued

SHRI. NAGARAJ VINAYAK JOSHI,KARAWAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

133A of the Act on 16.11.2017. During the course of survey, certain books of accounts and documents were impounded. Statement of the assessee was also recorded. Thereafter, statement under section 131 of the Act was recorded on ITA Nos.238 and 239/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 22 23.11.2017 wherein assessee voluntarily offered expenditure of Rs.20 Lakhs incurred on construction of three residential

SHRI. NAGARAJ VINAYAK JOSHI,KARAWAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

133A of the Act on 16.11.2017. During the course of survey, certain books of accounts and documents were impounded. Statement of the assessee was also recorded. Thereafter, statement under section 131 of the Act was recorded on ITA Nos.238 and 239/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 22 23.11.2017 wherein assessee voluntarily offered expenditure of Rs.20 Lakhs incurred on construction of three residential

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

133A of the Income tax Act, 1961 was also\nconducted at the headquarter of the South Canara\nDistrict Credit Co-operative Bank Limited (in short\nSCDCC Bank) on 27.12.2016, wherein Mr. M.N.\nRajendra Kumar is the Chairman and he has made a\nsworn statement.\n7.4 Consequent to the search and seizure operation on\nMr. M.N. Rajendra Kumar, and survey under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE, BANGALORE vs. AMRUTHA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the CO of the assessee is partly allowed

transferred to the\nthree 3 entities who in turn give back the cash. Notices under\nsection 133(6) of the Act issued to those entities but no reply\nreceived. Therefore, the AO has no option but to presume those\nentities as bogus.\n- The fact that Form 26 of Avexa does not reflect the entries in the\nname

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

133A of the Income tax Act, 1961 was also\nconducted at the headquarter of the South Canara\nDistrict Credit Co-operative Bank Limited (in short\nSCDCC Bank) on 27.12.2016, wherein Mr. M.N.\nRajendra Kumar is the Chairman and he has made a\nsworn statement.\n7.4 Consequent to the search and seizure operation on\nMr. M.N. Rajendra Kumar, and survey under

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

133A of the Income tax Act, 1961 was also\nconducted at the headquarter of the South Canara\nDistrict Credit Co-operative Bank Limited (in short\nSCDCC Bank) on 27.12.2016, wherein Mr. M.N.\nRajendra Kumar is the Chairman and he has made a\nsworn statement.\n\n7.4 Consequent to the search and seizure operation on\nMr. M.N. Rajendra Kumar, and survey

WESTERN DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES INC,USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1) , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Transfer Pricing (TP) Study Report of SanDisk India. These documents indicated that the marketing support services provided by SanDisk India were exclusively rendered to SanDisk International Ltd., Ireland, and not to the assessee. Based on this, the assessee contended that in the absence of marketing support services, the creation of a Dependent Agency PE could not be established. 8.1 However

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

133A of the Act was conducted at office premises of the assessee company situated at City center, JC Road, Bengaluru on 20/07/2018. During the course of survey and post survey enquiries, it is found that the assessee has entered into Joint Development Agreement as tabulated below:- Sl. Name of JDA with Area Revenue No the Concern Sharing 01 Anushka Realty

SRI. GIREESHSHASTRI SHANKARSHASTRI JEERE ,GAJENDRAGAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Gireeshshastri Shankarshastri Jeere, The Principal Commissioner Of Prop : Fakeeresh Fuels, Income Tax (Central), Kustagi Road, Main Road, Vs. Bengaluru. Gajendragad – 582 114. Pan : Agupj 2460 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. R. Chandrashekar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. D. K. Mishra, Cit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.06.2023

133A of the Act on 16.11.2017. During the course of survey, certain books of accounts and documents were impounded. Statement of the assessee was also recorded. Thereafter, statement under section 131 of the Act was recorded on 23.11.2017 wherein assessee voluntarily offered expenditure of Rs.20 Lakhs incurred on construction of three residential houses as additional income over and above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BENGALURU

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the revenue are\ndismissed

price.\n\n2. All significant risk and rewards of ownership have been\ntransferred to the buyer.\n\n3. The seller retains no effective control of the goods transferred.\n\n4. There is no significant uncertainty regarding the amount of\nthe consideration that will be derived from sale of goods.\n\n10.3 The guidance note on accounting for real estate transactions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all these 4 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

pricing exercise)\ncannot negate the nature of the transaction. It would lead to an\nabsurd conclusion if, all else constant, the fact that no payment is\ndemanded negates accrual of income to the overseas entity. ......\n\n\".......The nomenclature or lesser-than-expected amount charged\nfor such services cannot change the nature of the services.\nIndeed, once it is established