M/S. MUKKA PROTENIS LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

133A of the Act was conducted at the Factory premises at Sasihitlu and Godown at Baikampady on 08/02/2018. 2.3 During the course of search, statement was recorded u/s. 132[4] of the Act of the Managing Director of the assessee, wherein the Managing Director admitted certain additional income on account of alleged bogus purchases and additional income on account

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

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

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

133A on SCDCC Bank, wherein certain documents were found and seized. Based on the said documents, it was detected that the Assessee has received a cash component on sale of its Projects viz., Micasa, Ventura, Primero and Padavu, which has escaped the assessment. Accordingly, the case was reopened under section 147 and notice under section 148 was issued

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

133A on SCDCC Bank, wherein certain documents were found and seized. Based on the said documents, it was detected that the Assessee has received a cash component on sale of its Projects viz., Micasa, Ventura, Primero and Padavu, which has escaped the assessment. Accordingly, the case was reopened under section 147 and notice under section 148 was issued

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

133A of the Income tax Act, 1961 was also conducted at the headquarter of the South Canara District Credit Co-operative Bank Limited (in short SCDCC Bank) on 27.12.2016, wherein Mr. M.N. Rajendra Kumar is the Chairman and he has made a sworn statement. 7.4 Consequent to the search and seizure operation on Mr. M.N. Rajendra Kumar, and survey under

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), 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), 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 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

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

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

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

133A and physical inspection of the premises of the new undertaking on 23/02/2006 and statements were also recorded. In the original return the assessee had made a claim for deduction u/s 10B in respect of the undertaking known as M/s Bharat Mines & Minerals which was established in pursuance of the legal agreement executed with Development Commissioner of CSEZ dt. 03/06/2003

M/S ARROW ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.DIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assesssee’s appeals are dismissed, the appeals of the Revenue and the Cross-Objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri. S. Jayaraman

133A and the appellant's own admission of existence of partial income attributable to the Indian operations do IT(TP)A.209,210,617 to 619,COs.31 to 33/B/2011 Page - 15 not support the appellant's arguments that their case is not covered under Section 9(1) (i) as also their argument about existence of PE in India. It is also