GOBINDRAM CHANDRAMANI VIVEK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

D E R PER SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal, filed by assessee, has arisen from the appellate order dated 07.07.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), NFAC,Delhi (hereinafter called “the CIT(A)”) (vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1054203908(1)), for the assessment year 2011-12, which appeal before ld. CIT(A), NFAC in turn

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

D) Rs. 68,81,000/- 4.2 Further, the assessee against the taxable income at normal slab rate of Rs. 68,81,000/- claimed deduction under section 80G of the Act . ITA No.2194 & 2195/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 16 for Rs. 68,81,000/- only. Hence, the assessee declared total income of Rs. 36,78,25,370/- being taxable at special rate

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

The appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

D]\n14,60,95,303\n54,28,86,124\n27,14,43,062\n3.8 In the assessment proceedings, the A.O. held that the liability\nto capital gains arises for the assessment year 2017-18 as\noccupancy certificate was received on 01/02/2017 for commercial\nportion and 17/03/2017 for residential portion. On the other-hand\nboth these persons contended that the liability

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

17-18 was not\nwilful but due to lack of details from Millenia Realtors Pvt. Ltd., and\nthe same may be considered leniently”.\n3.3\nThereafter Sri Alagappa Annamalai retracted the statement\nvide letter dated 04/02/2020 filed before DDIT [Inv.], Unit-3[4],\nBengaluru along with an Affidavit. The retraction was also filed\nbefore the A.O. vide letter dated 06/02/2020 along

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

D-103, B-13 and villa no.15 and declared capital gains amounting to Rs. 4,74,72,475/-. It is an undisputed fact that the total cost at which the land was transferred to all the partners was Rs.2,72,00,000/- out of which the owners share being Rs.1,04,72,000/- ( 38.5%). It is also an undisputed fact

K A SUJIT CHANDAN,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE BENGALURU.-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result all the three appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

D-103, B-13 and villa no.15 and declared capital gains amounting to Rs. 4,74,72,475/-. It is an undisputed fact that the total cost at which the land was transferred to all the partners was Rs.2,72,00,000/- out of which the owners share being Rs.1,04,72,000/- ( 38.5%). It is also an undisputed fact

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

17-18 was not\nwilful but due to lack of details from Millenia Realtors Pvt. Ltd., and\nthe same may be considered leniently”.\n3.3 Thereafter Sri Alagappa Annamalai retracted the statement\nvide letter dated 04/02/2020 filed before DDIT [Inv.], Unit-3[4],\nBengaluru along with an Affidavit. The retraction was also filed\nbefore the A.O. vide letter dated 06/02/2020 along

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

5(2)(1), Bengaluru. V Main Road, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru – 560 069. . PAN – AABFP 4517 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept, Date of hearing : 04.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.01.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee

M/S. ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALUAU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

5. We have heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. Before going into the issue in detail, we will consider the provisions which are relevant to the issue involved in this appeal and for the sake of clarity, we reproduce the sections. “Section 2(14)"capital asset" means— (a)property of any kind held by an assessee

HANCHIPURA CHANNAIAH NANDAKISHORE,MAHALKSHMIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD INTL, TAXATION 1(2) BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.258/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Hanchipura Channaiah Nandakishore 87, 2Nd Stage & Phase Mahalakshmipuram 2Nd Stage, 14Th Main, West Of Chord Ito Road Vs. Ward International Taxation 1(2) Mahalakshmipuram Bangalore Bangalore 560 086 Pan No :Blrpn0428A Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.R. Respondent By : Dr. Divya K.J., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2025

5 of 16 that the amendment in section 139(1) of sixth Proviso, section 54, section 54B or section 54D or section 54EC or section 54F or section 54G or section 54GA or section 54GB were inserted by the Finance Act, 2019 which is effective from 01.04.2020, but the impugned case on hand is related

SHARADA MOHAN SHETTY,KARWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2, KARWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Or During The Courses Of Appeal Hearing.” 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 30/09/2015 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Declaring Page 2 Of 16

D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NAFC, Delhi vide order dated 18/08/2022with the following grounds of appeal:- “The learned AO erred in concluding the assessment by disallowing exemption of Rs. 1,86,63,291/- claimed by the Appellant u/s 54F ol the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though

NAVJYOTI SHARMA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT ASMNT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

d)of the Act along with the notice u/s. 148 of the Act were served to the assessee. In response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee filed his return of income on 11/01/2024. From the return of income filed by the assessee, it was seen by the AO that the assessee had claimed cost of acquisition with

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

section 36(2) of the Act. 5. Accordingly, no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon.” 21. From the above, it becomes clear that claim for any debt or part thereof shall be admissible

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

section 36(2) of the Act. 5. Accordingly, no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon.” 21. From the above, it becomes clear that claim for any debt or part thereof shall be admissible

M/S OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

section 36(2) of the Act. 5. Accordingly, no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon.” 21. From the above, it becomes clear that claim for any debt or part thereof shall be admissible

M/S. OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

section 36(2) of the Act. 5. Accordingly, no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon.” 21. From the above, it becomes clear that claim for any debt or part thereof shall be admissible

M/S OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

section 36(2) of the Act. 5. Accordingly, no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon.” 21. From the above, it becomes clear that claim for any debt or part thereof shall be admissible

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD 1, UDUPI, UDUPI vs. BRAHMAVARA VYAVASAYA SEVA, BRAHMAVARA

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue are allowed and the COs\nfiled by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

5 of 22\nITA Nos.656, 667, 668/Bang/2024\nC.O. Nos. 10, 11, 12/Bang/2024\nco-operative banks are essentially also a co-operative society. As regards\nthe interest income for Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21, the\nCIT(A) held that the same is assessed as “Income from Other Sources”. In\nholding so, the CIT(A) relied on the judgment

POONAM GUPTA ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This appeal is filed by Mrs. Poonam Gupta (the assessee/appellant) for assessment year 2017 – 18 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [ld. CIT(A)] dated 21st February 2025 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the reassessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s