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

Section 45[5A] of the Act, has been\ninserted that the date of occupancy certificate is relevant for\ndetermining the taxation of capital gains. The appellant has relied\nupon the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of N.A. Harris in\nITA No.988/Bang/2018 dated 15/02/2021 specifically para [33] on\npage 200 to 202. Appellant also relies upon

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

capital gains in construction of residential house would suffice to claim the benefit of Section 54 of the Act.” 7.3 Further, it is worthwhile here to mention that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. T.N. Aravinda Reddy reported in (1979) 120 ITR 46hasheld that the ordinary meaning of word “purchase

NAVJYOTI SHARMA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT ASMNT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains in construction of residential house would suffice to claim the benefit of Section 54 of the Act.” 7.3 Further, it is worthwhile here to mention that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax IT(IT)A No.235/Bang/2025 Navjyoti Sharma, Bangalore Page 11 of 14 v. T.N. Aravinda Reddy reported

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

254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") dated 07.12.2022 for Assessment Year 2012-13 in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The Appellant denies herself liable to be assessed on a total income

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

capital expenditure is governed by the Section 43A of the Act. Since in the above batch of the appeals, the assessment year involved was 1998-99, the SC decided the issue in view of Section 43A (pre-amended w.e.f. 01/04/2003) of the Act. After 1-4-2003, the issue is governed by the amended Section

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

capital expenditure is governed by the Section 43A of the Act. Since in the above batch of the appeals, the assessment year involved was 1998-99, the SC decided the issue in view of Section 43A (pre-amended w.e.f. 01/04/2003) of the Act. After 1-4-2003, the issue is governed by the amended Section

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

capital expenditure is governed by the Section 43A of the Act. Since in the above batch of the appeals, the assessment year involved was 1998-99, the SC decided the issue in view of Section 43A (pre-amended w.e.f. 01/04/2003) of the Act. After 1-4-2003, the issue is governed by the amended Section

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MR. AMARTHYA SIDDHARTHA L/R OF LATE SRI. V G . SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MRS. MALAVIKA HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. LATE SHRI V G SIDDHARTHA, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIR MS. MALVIKA HEGDE, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the . ITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 116 Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from

MR. ISHAAN HEGDE L/R OF LATE SRI. V G SIDDHARTHA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the\norder of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well\nas the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the\nITA No.1442 to 1447, 2129 to 2132, 1448 to 1453 & 1454 to 1459/Bang/2024\nPage 15 of 116\nTribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from