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

capital gain. During the course of assessment\nproceedings, AO found from the books of accounts and materials available\nbefore him that assessee has claimed depreciation on goodwill and this issue\nwas not raised at the time of 143(3) of the Act assessment but while\ndisallowing the depreciation on goodwill are not borne out from seized\nmaterial found during

ARCHANA RAVI KUMAR ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(5), BENGALURU

In the result stay petition becomes infructuous and hence dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeysa No.142/Bang/2025 & Assessment Year : 2018-19

capital gain of ₹ 7,320,000 was assessed in the hands of the assessee. Against this the assessee has preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A who disposed of the appeal of the assessee on the basis of the statement of facts and grounds of appeal for the reason that assessee did not respond to the notices issued

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

capital gain. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO found from the books of accounts and materials available before him that assessee has claimed depreciation on goodwill and this issue was not raised at the time of 143(3) of the Act assessment but while disallowing the depreciation on goodwill are not borne out from seized material found during

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

capital gain. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO found from the books of accounts and materials available before him that assessee has claimed depreciation on goodwill and this issue was not raised at the time of 143(3) of the Act assessment but while disallowing the depreciation on goodwill are not borne out from seized material found during

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

capital gain. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO found from the books of accounts and materials available before him that assessee has claimed depreciation on goodwill and this issue was not raised at the time of 143(3) of the Act assessment but while disallowing the depreciation on goodwill are not borne out from seized material found during

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

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

capital gain. During the course of assessment\nproceedings, AO found from the books of accounts and materials available\nbefore him that assessee has claimed depreciation on goodwill and this issue\nwas not raised at the time of 143(3) of the Act assessment but while\ndisallowing the depreciation on goodwill are not borne out from seized\nmaterial found during

M/S. TECHNICOLOR INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-11

gain I loss while computing the operating margins. 12. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/DRP/ TPO have erred in not providing any comparability and economic adjustments as required under Rule 1OB(1)(e)(iii) of the Rules. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

CANARA BANK,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

920/-. 3.1. The learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the fact that the appellant is accounting the interest on income tax refunds when the same is granted after giving effect to the orders of appellate authority. 3.2. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the interest received by the Appellant Bank for the impugned Asst Year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. CANARA BANK, BENGALURU

In the result, revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

920/-. 3.1. The learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the fact that the appellant is accounting the interest on income tax refunds when the same is granted after giving effect to the orders of appellate authority. 3.2. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the interest received by the Appellant Bank for the impugned Asst Year

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

920/-\n27.07.2019\n2.3 The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 153A\nr.w.s. 143(3) of the Act determining total income as under:\nA.Y.\nAmount (Rs.)\n2013-14\n5,34,23,070/-\n2014-15\n4,53,13,710/-\n2015-16\n6,10,53,840/-\n2016-17\n7,26,68,760/-\n2017-18\n7,63,82,510/-\n2.4 A search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BENGALURU

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the revenue are\ndismissed

capital gains for transfer of\nproperty.\n\n8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed\nas simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of\nproperty, the transferor and transferee exercise effective\ncontrol over the transaction. In the present scenario the\nassessee has no control over the sale porocess (right to\nchoose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. ANUSHKA REALTY INC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S ANUSHKA ESTATES, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

capital gains for transfer of property. 8. The revenue received by the assessee cannot be constructed as simple case of transfer of property. In any transfer of property, the transferor and transferee exercise effective control over the transaction. In the present scenario the assessee has no control over the sale p0rocess (right to choose the transferee) and the cancellation

HOSKOTE CHIKKEGOWDA MADEGOWDA ,MYSURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), MYSURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

capital gains and other sources. For year under consideration, he filed the return of income on 15.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.14,14,580/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and various details were called for to investigate the cash deposits made by assessee during the demonetisation period. Assessee filed details through ITBA portal which was Page