Smt Prathima Reddy v. ITO, Ward-6(4)

Smt. Sridevi, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2008-09 Smt. Sridevi, No. 2395, E-Block, The Income Tax Officer, Sahakaranagar, Vs. Ward – 6 (3) (3), Bangalore – 560 092. Bangalore. Pan: Aicpr5099Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri U. Lakshmoji Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri Palani Kumar, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2019

…upra) has held as under : " We have given our thoughtful consideration and rival submissions and facts and circumstances of the case and also gone through the order of the authorities below. As the case referred as Smt Prathima Reddy Vs ITO, Ward- 6(4) (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 264(Hyd.) by the learned DR actually dissimilar to the facts of the present case because in the said case, the controversy was with regard to the assessment year, but the determination of value was not in dispute. However, in the instant case, the main controversy is not with regard to the assessment year, but it is of the valuation of propert…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore vs. M/S CPC Logistics Ltd, Mangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ C ’ BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. A. No.1428/Bang/2014 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Mangalore. …. Appellant. Vs. M/s. CPC Logistics Ltd., (Formerly known as CPC (India) Ltd.), 191-B, Baikampady Indl. Area, Mangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III (D.R) Respondent By : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate. Date of Hearing : 25.7.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 19.8.2016. O R D E R Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M. : This appeal by…

Sri. N.G. Chandra Reddy (HUF), Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

…) has held as under : “ We have given our thoughtful consideration and rival submissions and facts and circumstances of the case and also gone through the order of the authorities below. As the case referred as Smt Prathima Reddy Vs ITO, Ward- 6(4) (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 264(Hyd.) by the learned DR actually dissimilar to the facts of the present case because in the said case, the controversy was with regard to the assessment year, but the determination of value was not in dispute. However, in the instant case, the main controversy is not with regard to the assessment year, but it is of the valuation of propert…

ACIT, Mangalore vs. Smt. Sarojini M. Kushe, Mangalore

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

…rue value of asset is the cost of construction which is actually money spent in bringing the assets to life. The learned DR further relied on the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT at Hyderabad in case of Smt Prathima Reddy Vs ITO, Ward-6(4) (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 264(Hyd.) and emphasized that similar issue was decided by the said Bench, as the said Bench determined the cost of construction while transferring the assets. On the other hand, learned AR relied on the orders of CIT(A) and submitted that the learned CIT(A) was agreed on the submissions of the assessee that for the deemed transfer of JDA the…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Shankar Vittal Motor Co. Ltd., Mangalore

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry

…value of asset is the cost of construction which is actually money spent in bringing the assets to life. The learned DR further relied on the judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT at Hyderabad in case of Smt Prathima Reddy Vs ITO, Ward-6(4) (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 264(Hyd.) and emphasized that similar issue was decided by the said Bench, as the said Bench determined the cost of construction while transferring the assets. On the other hand, learned AR relied on the orders of CIT(A) 9 ITA No.35(Bang)/2015 and submitted that the learned CIT(A) was agreed on the submissions of the assessee that for the…