SRI ALAGAPPA ANNAMALAI(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

145 and the said provisions applicable where the\ncapital gain arises to an assessee, being an individual or HUF, from\nthe transfer of capital asset, being land and building or both, under\na specified agreement, the capital gain shall be chargeable to\nincome tax as income of the previous year in which the certificate of\ncompletion for the whole

SRI ALAGAPPA MUTHIAH(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

145 and the said provisions applicable where the\ncapital gain arises to an assessee, being an individual or HUF, from\nthe transfer of capital asset, being land and building or both, under\na specified agreement, the capital gain shall be chargeable to\nincome tax as income of the previous year in which the certificate of\ncompletion for the whole

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

145 ITD 491 and in case of Fidelity\nInvestment Trust reported in 36 SOT 22, wherein it was held that short\nterm capital loss arising from STT-paid transactions is allowable to be set\noff against other capital gains, even if taxed at different rates.\n6.5 The assessee therefore argued that it was legally entitled to set\noff the short

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU vs. HIREHAL JAIRAJ BALRAM, BENGALURU

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

gain\nwhich arises from the transfer of a capital asset, which\ncould be brought to tax under Section 45 read with Section\n48 of the Income Tax Act.\n13. The assessee in the affidavit explaining the delay in filing the\nappeal late before the Tribunal has also mentioned the\nfactual aspects and the legal dispute and has stated on oath

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, UDUPI, UUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UDUPI

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they\ncannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn\ninterest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the\nbusiness of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not\ncarrying on any separate

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, UDUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UPPUNDA

145\nprovides that the Central Government may notify Income\nComputation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) for any class of\nassessees or for any class of income. Accordingly, the Central\nGovernment notified 10 ICDS vide Notification No.S.O.892(E) dated\n31st March, 2015 with effect from assessment year 2016-17. It is to\nbe noted that ICDS is not meant for maintenance

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain was declared at Rs. 29,74,951 by the assessee in the original return, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed the revised return of income showing higher income. The said return of income was accompanied by a note in which the assessee submitted that he surrendered

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain was declared at Rs. 29,74,951 by the assessee in the original return, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed the revised return of income showing higher income. The said return of income was accompanied by a note in which the assessee submitted that he surrendered

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain was declared at Rs. 29,74,951 by the assessee in the original return, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed the revised return of income showing higher income. The said return of income was accompanied by a note in which the assessee submitted that he surrendered

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gain was declared at Rs. 29,74,951 by the assessee in the original return, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed the revised return of income showing higher income. The said return of income was accompanied by a note in which the assessee submitted that he surrendered

INSTAKART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

gains of business or profession" or "Income from other sources" has to be computed and it lays down that such income shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be computed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. Sub-section (2) of section 145 provides that the Central Government may notify

INSTAKART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the stay application dismissed as infructuous

gains of business or\nprofession\" or \"Income from other sources\" has to be computed and it lays\ndown that such income shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be\ncomputed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting\nregularly employed by the assessee. Sub-section (2) of section 145 provides\nthat the Central Government may notify

DCIT, CC-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INSTAKART SERVICES PVT LTD, BENGALURU

In the result, the stay application dismissed as infructuous

gains of business or\nprofession\" or \"Income from other sources\" has to be computed and it lays\ndown that such income shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be\ncomputed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting\nregularly employed by the assessee. Sub-section (2) of section 145 provides\nthat the Central Government may notify

INSTAKART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANG-3, BANGALORE

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

gains of business or\nprofession\" or \"Income from other sources\" has to be computed and it lays\ndown that such income shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be\ncomputed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting\nregularly employed by the assessee. Sub-section (2) of section 145 provides\nthat the Central Government may notify

DCIT CC -1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INSTAKART SERVICES PVT LTD, BENGALURU

gains of business or\nprofession\" or \"Income from other sources\" has to be computed and it lays\ndown that such income shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be\ncomputed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting\nregularly employed by the assessee. Sub-section (2) of section 145 provides\nthat the Central Government may notify

M/S. ZASH TRADERS,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BENGALURU

gain. Further, it was\nobserved that there are four categories of capital assets enumerated\nin clauses (a), (aa), (ab) and (b) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of\nthe Act. Clause (b) is a residuary provision governing “any other capital\nasset”. Here, NFAC was concerned with the capital asset falling\nwithin the scope of sub-clause (aa) and category

M/S. ANAND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

gains of such transfer of capital assets does not fall on the erstwhile firm. This decision is wholly against the revenue. The revenue placed on the decision of the CIT v. Mansukh Dyeing & Printing Mills [2022] 145 taxmann.com 151/[2023] 290 Taxman 354/[2022] 449 ITR 439 (SC)/2022 SCC Online SC 1618 The facts of the case have been

M/S. ANAND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

gains of such transfer of capital assets does not fall on the erstwhile firm. This decision is wholly against the revenue. The revenue placed on the decision of the CIT v. Mansukh Dyeing & Printing Mills [2022] 145 taxmann.com 151/[2023] 290 Taxman 354/[2022] 449 ITR 439 (SC)/2022 SCC Online SC 1618 The facts of the case have been