SHRI K.G SUBBARAMA SETTY ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT 5(2)(1) BANGALORE, C R BUILDING

In the result all the three appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

147 of the Act on 10/02/2015 for the AY 2007-08 by calculating the short termcapital gains on transfer of land under the Joint development agreement dated 01/03/2007 as detailed belowfor ease of reference and convenience- ITA Nos.962 & 963/Bang/2025 K.S. Akhilesh Babu ITA No.964/Bang/2025 K.A. Sujith Chandan ITA No.965/Bang/2025 K.G. Subbarama Setty Page 27 of 33 Particulars Amount

CHINNAPPA ANTHONAPPA,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2010-11

section 54F of the Act, capital gain was invested in construction of residential house, but the fact that actual construction was completed beyond the period contemplated u/s. 54F of the Act was no ground to deny the benefit of deduction u/s. 54F. Applying the same analogy, the assessee pleaded that the capital gain in question should be allowed as deduction

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gains shown by assessee was bogus and no separate reason disclosing satisfaction of assessing Officer for formation of belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and assessment made in pursuance thereof was to be annulled. 41. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT v. Dhariya Construction

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital gains shown by assessee was bogus and no separate reason disclosing satisfaction of assessing Officer for formation of belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and assessment made in pursuance thereof was to be annulled. 41. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT v. Dhariya Construction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. R. MUNIRAJU (HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, & CO 2/Bang/2022 Page

MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion,\njewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or\nrequisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A,\nthen the books of account or documents or assets

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion,\njewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or\nrequisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A,\nthen the books of account or documents or assets

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion,\njewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or\nrequisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A,\nthen the books of account or documents or assets

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion,\njewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or\nrequisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A,\nthen the books of account or documents or assets

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

147, section 148, section 149,\nsection 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion,\njewellery or other valuable article or thing or any books of account or documents seized or\nrequisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A,\nthen the books of account or documents

SHRI.J M VRUSHABENDRAIAH ,HOSPET vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

capital gains shown by the Assessee was bogus and no separate reason disclosing satisfaction of the assessing officer for formation of belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and the consequential assessment was to be annulled. k. Reliance is also placed on the parity of reasoning laid

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2)(3), BANGALORE vs. SRI MADE GOWDA THIBBE GOWDA, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2008-09

capital gains shown by assessee was bogus and no separate reason disclosing satisfaction of assessing Officer for formation of belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and assessment made in pursuance thereof was to be annulled. 46. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT v. Dhariya Construction

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than

SRI MAHENDRASINGH RAMSINGH JADAV,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(5), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

147 of the I.T.Act was completed vide order dated 22.03.2016, wherein the income arising on sale of the 3 Sri.Mahendrasingh Ramsingh Jadav . impugned flat was treated as short term capital gains (STCG), and accordingly, deduction u/s 54 of the I.T.Act on reinvestment was denied. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. N G BALU REDDY HUF, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2009-10

section 148 of the Act on 08.03.2013 in the hands of assessee (HUF) for the AY- 2009-10 assessing the capital gain arising out of the JDA dt. 12.05.2004 in the assessee (HUF) hands. In response to notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 08.03.2013 the Assessee filed return under protest disclosing capital gain in the hand

SMT. K.R.YASHODHA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2007-08

gain chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of omission/failure on the part of the assessee to make true and correct return of income within the time allowed as per provisions of the Act. 4. Having reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, the AO determined the capital