SHRI. SUNIL KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Shri Sunil Kumar Jalan Vs The Income Tax Officer - 6(3)(1) No.703, 7Th Floor, Ebony Bmtc Building, 80Ft Road A Wing, Godrej Woods Apts 6Th Block, Koramangla Near Hebbal Flyover Bengaluru 560095 Bangalore 560024 Pan – Acdpj0966D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.K. Prasad, Advocate Revenue By: Dr. Sankar Ganesh K., Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.02.2023 O R D E R Per: George George K., J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Cit(A)’S Order Dated 25.11.2019. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: - The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In Granite Business. For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Return Of Income Was Filed On 28.11.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.13,52,370/- Consisting Of Income From House Property, Capital Gains & Business Income. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Issued On 18.09.2015. The Assessee’S Ar Attended Hearing On 30.12.2016 & 2 Shri Sunil Kumar Jalan Produced The Books Of Accounts & Other Details. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Concluded The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2016 Making The Following Addition: -

Capital Gains under section 10(38) of the Income - Tax Act by disregarding the facts, evidences and reasons and merely on the basis of suspicion, presumptions and without due and independent application of mind on the generalised report of the Investigation Wing of Kolkata, in total defiance of natural justice by denying sharing of the information and evidences collected behind

M/S. POWER POINT,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2019-20

194(1) of the Act for the payment of rent Rs. 2,52,000/- and 30% thereof amounting to Rs. 75,600/- c. Disallowance of the salary expenses to the extent of 30% of Rs. 1,09,40,705/- amounting to Rs. 32,82,212/- for not substantiating the genuineness/applicability of provisions of TDS. d. Vehicle maintenance: The Assessing Officer

M/S. BHARAT ELECTRONICS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Ltu, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacb5985C Appellant Respondent

gain of Rs.10,17,445/-. Page 5 4. The assessing officer further noted from the financial statements that the assessee has made payments which are capable of generating income which are exempt from tax and has received dividend of Rs.2,60,00,000/- from GE BE Pvt. Ltd. which was claimed as exempt income

BADERUNNISA ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2023-24

section 194-IA of the Act. The assessee, in turn, discharged the capital gains tax liability in full, not only

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAICHUR, RAICHUR vs. MARALBID PADMAVATHI, RAICHUR

In the result, appeal filed by theRevenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2016-17 Ito, Vs. Maralbid Padmavathi, Ward – 1, 4-4-145, Zahirabad Raichur, Raichur. Raichur – 584 101, Karnataka. Pan :Anhpp 8615 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Shankar Ganesh D, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.10.2025

section 142(1) of the Act which is quoted in the Assessment Order dated 14.03.2022, assessee did Page 3 of 8 not furnish any reply. However, assessee has also furnished 7 sale deeds for 12 plots with the sale consideration value different in some plots and vary from the information uploaded by the DDIT (Inv), Bellary on the basis

EXPAT ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

gains of business or profession”. Both these sections operate in different fields, the former is an enabling provision while the latter is a disabling provision. 14. The question directly arose for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733 and the question that was considered

EXPAT ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

gains of business or profession”. Both these sections operate in different fields, the former is an enabling provision while the latter is a disabling provision. 14. The question directly arose for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733 and the question that was considered

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARI vs. M/S. NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST, RAICHUR

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

capital gains, then addition as income from other sources and income from other sources is also accepted, therefore, the question of law framed in this regard namely, substantial questions of law No.3, 4, 5 and 8 do not arise for consideration in this appeal, as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has passed the order 'on the aforesaid Remand Report

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue as well as\nCos of the Assessee for the Asst

194) has held\nthat interest arising from investment made, in compliance with\nstatutory provisions to enable it to carry on banking business, out\nof reserve fund by a co-operative society engaged in banking\nbusiness, is exempt under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act,\n1961. The placement of such funds being imperative for the\npurpose

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

gains derived from the\nconduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. In\nthis connection, it may be pointed out that whenever the legislature\nwanted to give a restricted meaning in the manner suggested by the\nlearned Solicitor General, it has used the expression "derived from", as\nfor instance, in Section 80J. In our view, since the expression

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

gains derived from the\nconduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. In\nthis connection, it may be pointed out that whenever the legislature\nwanted to give a restricted meaning in the manner suggested by the\nlearned Solicitor General, it has used the expression \"derived from\", as\nfor instance, in Section 80J. In our view, since the expression

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

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

gains derived from the conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. In this connection, it may be pointed out that whenever the legislature wanted to give a restricted meaning in the manner suggested by the learned Solicitor General, it has used the expression \"derived from\", as for instance, in Section 80J. In our view, since the expression

THE BELTHANGADY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SANGHA LIMITED,BELTHANGADY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , PUTTUR

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

194 vide order dated 22 August 2001 has\ndirected to allow deduction of the same under the provisions of section\n80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The relevant extract of the judgement is\nreproduced as under:\nITA No.1927 & 1943/Bang/2024\nPage 11 of 16\nThere is no doubt, and it is not disputed, that the assessee-co-operative bank

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

gains that are derived from the export. There cannot be any doubt that interest income earned by members credit co-operative society can said to be “attributable to” the business of providing credit facilities to its members. Kindly note that the deduction u/s. 80P is not with respect to an activity but with reference to business as a whole

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTPU , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

capital adjustment shall be carried out in the light of above order of the Tribunal. Ordered accordingly. IT(TP)A No.2846/Bang/2017 M/s. Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 20 of 47 16. With regard to Ground Nos.5 & 6, no argument has been put before us by the ld. A.R., hence not considered for adjudication. 17. Ground No.7

HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY ,HUBBALLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), HUBALLI

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

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

gains of business or profession. The assessee has separately accounted for the service tax collected is also the indirect part of turnover because it is received along with turnover. The assessee has not shown any invoice raised by him before us as per service tax Rules, which is mandatory for the service provider to issue invoice to the service recipient

NAGINI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital of the society and shall be deposited into Page 3 of 15 ITA Nos. 25 to 27/Bang/2025 the co -operative Bank hence there is a Business nexus to the earning of interest income hence eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) The reliance is placed on following case laws a. Lankapalli PACS Ltd V/s ITO, held

NAGINI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital of the society and shall be deposited into Page 3 of 15 ITA Nos. 25 to 27/Bang/2025 the co -operative Bank hence there is a Business nexus to the earning of interest income hence eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) The reliance is placed on following case laws a. Lankapalli PACS Ltd V/s ITO, held

NAGINI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital of the society and shall be deposited into Page 3 of 15 ITA Nos. 25 to 27/Bang/2025 the co -operative Bank hence there is a Business nexus to the earning of interest income hence eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) The reliance is placed on following case laws a. Lankapalli PACS Ltd V/s ITO, held