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

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

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

gain was calculated\nat Rs.26,06,434/-. Assessee filed detailed written submissions which was\nconsidered and not accepted and AO made addition under the LTCG of\nRs.26,06,434/-.\n3. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the\nCIT(A). The learned CIT(A), observed that the assessee did not satisfy the condition of section\n54F

SMT SUSHAMA RAJESH RAO ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2012-13 Sushama Rajesh Rao, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner No.159, Priyadarshani, R. T. Nagar, Of Income Tax, Mla Layout, Circle – 6(2)(1), Bangalore – 560 032. Bangalore. Pan : Acypr 5251 J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. V. Chandrashekar, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025

capital gain. Now, speaking about the provisions of section 64(1)(iv) of the Act is a well considered after thought to evade tax liability and further the assessee has not raised these contentions before any of the lower authorities. It was further stated that principle of estoppel applies here which precludes the person from ascertain something contrary to what

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.

section 45(4) of the Act. In that case also the assessee received a share of goodwill. The Hon’ble High Court held that receipt of share value of goodwill cannot be subjected to capital gains tax as there was no transfer of goodwill to the firm. The Hon’ble High Court dealt the whole issue as under:- 12. Learned

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.

section 45(4) of the Act. In that case also the assessee received a share of goodwill. The Hon’ble High Court held that receipt of share value of goodwill cannot be subjected to capital gains tax as there was no transfer of goodwill to the firm. The Hon’ble High Court dealt the whole issue as under:- 12. Learned

WIPRO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 14A as computed under Rule 8D(2)(iii) cannot be more than the actual expenditure which can be relatable for earning the exempt income and debited to the Profit and Loss account. In the case on hand the disallowance made by the assessee on its own is not the total expenditure debited to the profit and loss account

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE vs. NADAKRISHNA THIMMAIAH, BANGALORE

gains taxation. It is\nonly T Nadakrishna, who is the rightful purchaser and owner of the\nagricultural land. Assuming but not admitting that the ld. AO's\naction of treating the income substantively in the Assessee's hand is\nappropriate, he submitted that on merits, the addition is bad in law.\nTransaction not taxable since the Assessee is neither

M/S. SPR SPIRITS PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SPR GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

gains taxation. It is\nonly T Nadakrishna, who is the rightful purchaser and owner of the\nPage 13 of 41\nITA Nos.130/Bang/2023\nM/s. SPR Spirits Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore\nITA No.653/Bang/2023\nNadakrishna Thimmaiah, Bangalore\nagricultural land. Assuming but not admitting that the ld. AO's\naction of treating the income substantively in the Assessee's hand is\nappropriate, he submitted that

NISHA VIJAY ISRANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

163/- may be allowed of cost of improvements being permanent fixtures and wall/ ground embedded. We agree with the contention of the assessee as we already held that the expenditure incurred which are permanent fixture, wall/ ground embedded are incurred only in order to make the house habitable and it becomes the part and parcel of building itself which

VIJAY LAKHMICHAND ISRANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

163/- may be allowed of cost of improvements being permanent fixtures and wall/ ground embedded. We agree with the contention of the assessee as we already held that the expenditure incurred which are permanent fixture, wall/ ground embedded are incurred only in order to make the house habitable and it becomes the part and parcel of building itself which

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-12 , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

gains of the business for the assessment year 1981-82. 2. The assessee had, in the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1981-82, claimed the deduction of Rs. 10,542 which amount had heed paid by it to the Income-tax Department as interest under section 201(1A). The claim so made was rejected

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

gains of the business for the assessment year 1981-82. 2. The assessee had, in the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1981-82, claimed the deduction of Rs. 10,542 which amount had heed paid by it to the Income-tax Department as interest under section 201(1A). The claim so made was rejected

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

gains of the business for the assessment year 1981-82. 2. The assessee had, in the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1981-82, claimed the deduction of Rs. 10,542 which amount had heed paid by it to the Income-tax Department as interest under section 201(1A). The claim so made was rejected

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

gains in\nits computation of income. Therefore, the revenue has failed to\nappreciate that the seller had paid taxes on the same and even on\nthis count the claim of depreciation by the appellant cannot be\ndenied.\n\nff.\nIn view of the above, the appellant submits that the disallowance of\ndepreciation claimed on goodwill is unsustainable

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

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

gains in\nits computation of income. Therefore, the revenue has failed to\nappreciate that the seller had paid taxes on the same and even on\nthis count the claim of depreciation by the appellant cannot be\ndenied.\n\nff.\nIn view of the above, the appellant submits that the disallowance of\ndepreciation claimed on goodwill is unsustainable

SHRI. SHANTHISAGAR CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

capital which are not immediately required to be lent to the members and invested with the bank for short period to earn interest. Then such interest will qualify as income attributable to the banking business or providing credit facility to the members. Therefore, it was asked to the assessee to furnished details regarding whether the deposited with the SUCO Bank

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

gains in its computation of income. Therefore, the revenue has failed to appreciate that the seller had paid taxes on the same and even on this count the claim of depreciation by the appellant cannot be denied. ff. In view of the above, the appellant submits that the disallowance of depreciation claimed on goodwill is unsustainable

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

gains in its computation of income. Therefore, the revenue has failed to appreciate that the seller had paid taxes on the same and even on this count the claim of depreciation by the appellant cannot be denied. ff. In view of the above, the appellant submits that the disallowance of depreciation claimed on goodwill is unsustainable

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

gains in its computation of income. Therefore, the revenue has failed to appreciate that the seller had paid taxes on the same and even on this count the claim of depreciation by the appellant cannot be denied. ff. In view of the above, the appellant submits that the disallowance of depreciation claimed on goodwill is unsustainable