SHRI BINDIGANAVALE RAVI ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

justice oriented inference. Facts must be viewed in the social milieu of a country." Therefore, keeping the aforesaid principles in mind, when we look at Section 48, the language employed is unambiguous. The intention is very clear. When a capital asset is transferred, in order to determine the capital gain Page 9 of 16 from such transfer, what

SHRI BHATKAL RAMARAO PRAKASH ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(2)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2015-16

justice oriented inference. Facts must be viewed in the social milieu of a country.” Therefore, keeping the aforesaid principles in mind, when we look at Section 48, the language employed is unambiguous. The intention is very clear. When a capital asset is transferred, in order to determine the capital gain from such transfer, what is to be seen

SHRI. K.T. SANATH,BANGALORE vs. ADDL..C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2006-07

justice.” 3. The only issue that arises for consideration and adjudication in the facts and circumstances is, whether the gain arising from purchase and sale of shares is short term capital gain or business income? 4. The assessee is an individual and a partner in M/s. Astra Exports and M/s. Astra Processors partnership firms engaged in the business of Page

PRADEEP KAR,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Abraham P. Geoergeassessment Year : 2006-07

justice be rendered.” 2. Ground Nos.1 to 5 relate to nature of capital gain accrued to the assessee on sale

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. C. NARASIMHAIAH, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross

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

capital gains should have been computed. 13. The AO erred in adopting the formal registration dated 29.10.2005 instead of the correct date 27.11.1997 onwards for the purpose of transfer & improvements for cost indexation. 14.The brokerage and commission paid of Rs.30 lakhs by cheques was denied without cross examination of the parties is against the principle of natural justice

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

natural justice, hence the ITA Nos. 2373 to 2376/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 50 order requires to be cancelled. 4. That the notice, initiation and all subsequent proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law, is without jurisdiction, barred by law and requires to be cancelled. 5. The notice u/s 148 and service thereof is bad in law and the reassessment requires

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

natural justice, hence the ITA Nos. 2373 to 2376/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 50 order requires to be cancelled. 4. That the notice, initiation and all subsequent proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law, is without jurisdiction, barred by law and requires to be cancelled. 5. The notice u/s 148 and service thereof is bad in law and the reassessment requires

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

natural justice, hence the ITA Nos. 2373 to 2376/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 50 order requires to be cancelled. 4. That the notice, initiation and all subsequent proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law, is without jurisdiction, barred by law and requires to be cancelled. 5. The notice u/s 148 and service thereof is bad in law and the reassessment requires

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

natural justice, hence the ITA Nos. 2373 to 2376/Bang/2018 Page 2 of 50 order requires to be cancelled. 4. That the notice, initiation and all subsequent proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law, is without jurisdiction, barred by law and requires to be cancelled. 5. The notice u/s 148 and service thereof is bad in law and the reassessment requires

L. VIVEKANANDA,MYSORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

justice oriented inference. Facts must be viewed in the social milieu of a country." Therefore, keeping the aforesaid principles in mind, when we look at Section 48, the language employed is unambiguous. The intention is very clear. When a capital asset is transferred, in order to determine the capital gain from such transfer, what is to be seen

M/S PARAMANAND AND SONS,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years : 2020-21

capital gains in its original return of income. The AR further submitted that the CPC’s adjustment violated principles of natural justice

SMT. PADMA RAJAGOPALAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3)(5), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015 – 16

natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. b) The appellant denies herself liable to be assessed on a total income Rs.49,29,292/- as against Rs.5,19,220/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 2 Denial of exemption claimed under section 54F Rs.9,08,474/- of the Act in respect

SHRI. KOLA VENKAT RAMA NAIDU,BANGALORE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 6, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

natural justice. (3) The learned respondent seriously erred in not noticing the fact that in view of the pendency of the various legal litigation on the properties, the appellant had not got a complete legal rights over the property which were the subject Kola Venkat Rama Naidu, Bangalore Page 2 of 33 matter of Joint Development Agreement with

LATE SMT.K.LEELAVATHY BY L/R SHRI M.THIMMEGOWDA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

nature of the land use had not, however, undergone any change. Whether the lands which were used as agricultural lands even after its conversion loose its character of agricultural lands? ITA Nos.752 to 755/Bang/2019 Page 36 of 79 7.3. The stand of the AO was that once the agricultural lands were converted into non-agricultural, even though agricultural activity continues

LATE SMT.K.LEELAVATHY, BY L/R SHRI M.THIMMEGOWDA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

nature of the land use had not, however, undergone any change. Whether the lands which were used as agricultural lands even after its conversion loose its character of agricultural lands? ITA Nos.752 to 755/Bang/2019 Page 36 of 79 7.3. The stand of the AO was that once the agricultural lands were converted into non-agricultural, even though agricultural activity continues

LATE SMT.K.LEELAVATHY BY L/R SHRI M.THIMMEGOWDA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

nature of the land use had not, however, undergone any change. Whether the lands which were used as agricultural lands even after its conversion loose its character of agricultural lands? ITA Nos.752 to 755/Bang/2019 Page 36 of 79 7.3. The stand of the AO was that once the agricultural lands were converted into non-agricultural, even though agricultural activity continues

LATE SMT.K>LEELAVATHY BY L/R SHRI.M.THIMMEGOWDA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

nature of the land use had not, however, undergone any change. Whether the lands which were used as agricultural lands even after its conversion loose its character of agricultural lands? ITA Nos.752 to 755/Bang/2019 Page 36 of 79 7.3. The stand of the AO was that once the agricultural lands were converted into non-agricultural, even though agricultural activity continues

SRI KAMANAHALLI PILLA REDDY NAGESH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(3)(5), BANGALORE

Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Kamanahalli Pilla Reddy Nagesh, Kamanahalli Village, Kagur The Income Tax Post, Officer, Sarjapura Road, Ward – 4 [3] [5], Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Bangalore – 562 125. Pan: Adfpn8365H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Guruswamy, Itp : Shri V.S. Chakrapani, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-9, Bangalore For A.Y. 2014-15 On The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant, Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Cit[A] Is Not Justified In Upholding The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 143[3] Of The Act Despite The Fact That No Valid Notice U/S.143[2] Of The Act Was Served

justice.” 4. It is also submitted by the Ld.AR that in the event the additional grounds is considered, assessee would not press on the main grounds raised in the grounds of appeal. He also submitted that assessee had also raised additional grounds vide application dated 28.04.2022. 5. The Ld.AR at the outset submitted that on identical facts in case

DEV KUMAR ROY ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

natural love and affection can also make a valid gift. 79. The learned senior counsel, appearing for the assessee has also referred to various other enactments in which contextual reference has been made to show that a company can make gift to another person. He has referred to sec.115(WB)(2)(0) of the IT Act, pertaining to Fringe Benefits