SRI. RAMAKRISHNA NISHTALA,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save or otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SHRI. MALLAPPA SHARANAPPA UDNOOR,GULBARGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GULBARGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save or otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI. A.R. PRASAD,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 548, 54D, 54E

SMT. A.P. LAKSHMI GOWRI,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 548, 54D, 54E

M/S. SASKEN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Sasken Technologies Limited, Vs. Jcit, No.139/25, Ring Road, Domlur, Special Range – 6, Bengaluru-560071. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaecs 6424 R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Padam Chand Khincha, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 09.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2022 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.11.2019 Of Cit(A), Bengaluru -10, Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Ground No.1 Raised By The Assessee Is General & Calls For No Specific Adjudication. Grounds Nos.2 & 3 Raised By The Assessee Is With Regard To The Issue Whether The Gain On Sale / Assignment Of Intellectual Property Rights (Ipr) Is Assessable To Tax At All & If So Assessable To Tax Whether It Has To Be Assessed To Tax Under The Head “Income From Business Or Profession” Or “Capital Gain”. Page 2 Of 31

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54. 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI SUDHEER VALSALA SREEKUMARAN ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-14

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save or otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI. H.R. DIWAKA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

Capital Gain" and bringing to tax the balance of Rs.38,91,797/- as income under the head "Other Sources" under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. ITA No.771(B)/2016 3 4. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.2,37,500/- out of brokerage and commission, holding that

SRI.LOKESH M, LR OF SMT MALATHI LOKESH ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assesses are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI.LOKESH M, ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assesses are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI. C. RAMAIAH REDDYT vs. DCIT,

In the result, ITA No.1778/Bang/2012 (A

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SRI. C. RAMAIAH REDDYT vs. DCIT,

In the result, ITA No.1778/Bang/2012 (A

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

SMT.KONDAMMA ,BANGALORE ` vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(2)(4), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 Smt. Kondamma, No. 122/2, 6Th Main, The Income Tax Opp Srs Printer, Officer, Kammagondanhalli, Vs. Ward – 6 (2) (4), Jalahalli West, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 015. Pan: Atypk2334A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri H. Guruswamy, Itp Revenue By : Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2019

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save or otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

MR. PRAKASH CHAND BETHALA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2007-08

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), BANGALORE vs. SRI TNN SHETTY(HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz Assessment Year : 2005-06

gains had been deposited in the capital account of the HUF with a firm, M/s Tallam Textiles. A sum of Rs.75,60,000 was withdrawn by the HUF from its capital account and deposited in NHB Bonds worth Rs.9,10,000 and Rs.66,50,000 in REC Bonds. The explanation was accepted in the assessment of the individual

LATE JAGJIT SINGH BAJWA LEAGAL HEIR HARLEEN BAJWA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(3), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Capital Gain. Which is appealed before the CIT- NFAC, which concluded under in line with that of the ld. AO, resulted in appeal before us. 4. The ld. A.R. submitted that the Assessee is not having any exclusive ownership of more than one house property as on the date of investment in the new property and fully eligible to claim

SHRI. RAMESH V SHETTY ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2013-14

section 54E(1) and first proviso, that the investment was made in two different financial years which are well within the six months’ period from the date of transfer of long-term capital asset as stipulated u/s 54EC.” Shri Ramesh V. Shetty, Bangalore Page 2 of 4 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows: Assessee is an individual