THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The Delhi High Court further held that in the cases before it on the date of the search the assessment already stood concluded since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search, no additions could have

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Block, Orchard Green, Domlur, Bangalore-560071. The assessee and his wife also applied for housing loan at Citibank for purchase of the said residential house. Rs.40 Lakhs was paid as advance and the balance amount of Rs.1.5 Crores was paid to Citibank loan and the sale deed for purchase of residential house was registered in the name of his wife

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

property in question and the capital gains earned thereon had not been declared for tax. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.5,25,000/- was brought to tax. 15. Further at paragraph 8 of the order relating to bogus transportation expenses claimed for the assessment years 2009- 10 and 2010-11, the assessing officer has brought on record that the appellant

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ANZ OPERATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.F.A.No.1124/2011 C/W R.F.A.No.357/2011

Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore, bounded by: East : House No.138 West : House No.140 19 North : House No.134 South : Road. Item No.2: House including open space bearing No.27 (old 19-C), Patalamma Street, South End Circle, Basavanagudi, Bangalore, bounded by: East : Hotel Shop No.8 West : Road North : House No.26 South : House No.28 Item No.3: a) Consolidated coffee shares No.3000 b) Tata Tea Shares

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

THE PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block assessment proceeding under Chapter XIV-B only the undisclosed income found during the search and seizure operation were required to be assessed and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved. The introduction - 38 - of Section 153A of the Act provides a departure from this proceeding. Under Section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been given the power

M/S TRIMM EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order dated 08

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

BLOCK KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) - - - 2 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 08.09.2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.1646/BANG/2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, PRAYING TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND THE ANSWER THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.H.M.SHIVAMALLAIAH

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,N.KUMAR

Block Assessment passed in the hands of assessee sould have been passed in the hands of HUF even though the evidence clearly showed that the income earned was by the assessee individual and the properties - 9 - stood in the name of assessee individual by virtue of self acquisition or beneath from his father and consequently recorded a perverse finding

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE BELGAUM TALUKA RURAL INDUSTRIAL

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

Block No.52+59A situated within the limits of Sutagatti village, Hubli Taluk. The said property was purchased by Mallikarjun, Channabasappa Guddad from Concorde Developers under a registered deed of sale dated 18.02.2005, but the sale consideration was paid by defendant No.1 drawing necessary amount from the firm in his account. The said property is also not joint family property

M/S MANYATA PROMOTERS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, the writ petition is rejected

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice L Narayana Swamy Writ Petition No.56279 Of 2015 (Lb-Bbmp) Between: M/S.Manyata Promoters Pvt. Ltd., A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Having Its Office At First Floor, Classic Court No.9/1, Richmond Road, Bangalore 560 025 Represented By Its Authorized Signatory, Mr.B S Mohan.

Block No.F-3 and H2 occupied by the petitioner on 1.4.2014, respondents have assessed the property tax at Rs.8/- per sq. ft., under Category XIV(ii) of Table II vide Notification dated 30.1.2009, 10 which is accepted by R-3 Joint Commissioner on 1.3.2014. In spite of that impugned notices have been issued, which are not sustainable. (6) Air conditioning