SRI. LAXMIDAS BAPUDAS DARBAR,BAGALKOT vs. ITO, BAGALKOT

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2006-07

131 of the Act on 12.11.2008, wherein he admitted that investment of Rs.2,05,120 on construction was made by his wife and Page 8 of 22 that a sum of Rs.1,63,555 was spent by the assessee’s wife since the year 1972 and reflected in the balance sheet of the assessee’s wife’s business of ginning

NALAPAD PROPERTIES ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3) , BANGALORE

Section 45(5A) of the Act which is applicable\nfor the individuals and HUF and not applicable to the appellant which\nis a Registered partnership Firm.\n9. Without prejudice to the above ground it is urged that the Id. CIT(A)\nought to have appreciated the act that the delivery of possession of\nbuilt

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S EPSILON ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

131 .50 crores and the same was liable for capital gains. c) The Assessing Officer examined the matter and also the explanation offered for payment of such a higher premium for purchase of shares that too in a new company which has not started any business and also the closely held company, proceeded to record a finding that there

EPSILON ADVISORS P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

131 .50 crores and the same was liable for capital gains. c) The Assessing Officer examined the matter and also the explanation offered for payment of such a higher premium for purchase of shares that too in a new company which has not started any business and also the closely held company, proceeded to record a finding that there

EPSILON ADVISORS P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

131 .50 crores and the same was liable for capital gains. c) The Assessing Officer examined the matter and also the explanation offered for payment of such a higher premium for purchase of shares that too in a new company which has not started any business and also the closely held company, proceeded to record a finding that there

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S EPSILON ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

131 .50 crores and the same was liable for capital gains. c) The Assessing Officer examined the matter and also the explanation offered for payment of such a higher premium for purchase of shares that too in a new company which has not started any business and also the closely held company, proceeded to record a finding that there

SHANTHA ALIAS SHANTHAMMA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

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

gains, sale proceeds, and refundable deposits were also found to be unsustainable.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "153C", "143(2)", "132", "131", "45(5A)", "139(1)", "143(1)" ], "issues": "Whether the assessment proceedings initiated under Section 153C were valid in absence of incriminating material, proper satisfaction note, and notice u/s 143(2). Also, whether the additions made on account of capital

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

131 to the capital account stood unexplained, the AO treated it as undisclosed income. We are of the opinion that one more opportunity is to be provided to the assessee to explain the credit to the capital account as appearing in the balance sheet. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

131 to the capital account stood unexplained, the AO treated it as undisclosed income. We are of the opinion that one more opportunity is to be provided to the assessee to explain the credit to the capital account as appearing in the balance sheet. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

131 to the capital account stood unexplained, the AO treated it as undisclosed income. We are of the opinion that one more opportunity is to be provided to the assessee to explain the credit to the capital account as appearing in the balance sheet. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

131 to the capital account stood unexplained, the AO treated it as undisclosed income. We are of the opinion that one more opportunity is to be provided to the assessee to explain the credit to the capital account as appearing in the balance sheet. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide

NAGAMMA,RAICHUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE-WARD 1, RAICHUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

gain account scheme account. Hence, the amount spent on\nconstruction of house in Financial Year 2018-19 starting from January 2019\nwas not allowed under section 54F of the Act. The AO allowed index cost of\nacquisition of Rs.26,92,131/- and deduction under section 54B of the Act was\nallowed of Rs.16,01,435/-. Accordingly, long term capital

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain or as business income, ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 49 of 96 which issue not required to be answered at this stage as the income is not accrued in these assessment years. The quantum of applicability of Accounting Standard-9 with regard to revenue recognition is not required

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain or as business income, ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 49 of 96 which issue not required to be answered at this stage as the income is not accrued in these assessment years. The quantum of applicability of Accounting Standard-9 with regard to revenue recognition is not required

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain or as business income, ITA Nos.542 to 544/Bang/2021 & CO Nos.17 to 19/Bang/2021 Sri Mathikere Ramaiah Seetharam, Bangalore Page 49 of 96 which issue not required to be answered at this stage as the income is not accrued in these assessment years. The quantum of applicability of Accounting Standard-9 with regard to revenue recognition is not required

M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

131]. It is precisely for this reason that the legislature has introduced section 2(47)(v) read with section 45 which indicates that capital gains

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital asset in his hands and computed the capital gain on entering into release deed/relinquished deed. The AO however, treated it as business transaction and determined the business income from this transaction as against the income shown by assessee under head “Capital gain”. Against this, assessee is in appeal before us. 19.1 We have heard the rival submissions and perused

K. G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital asset in his hands and computed the capital gain on entering into release deed/relinquished deed. The AO however, treated it as business transaction and determined the business income from this transaction as against the income shown by assessee under head “Capital gain”. Against this, assessee is in appeal before us. 19.1 We have heard the rival submissions and perused