M/S.NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , , MANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Assessing Officer which read as under : To, The Navodaya Grama Vikas Charitable Trust, 14-7-1005, SCDCC Bank Ltd. HO Bldg., Kodialbai!, Mangalore 575003 Sir, Sub: Reopening

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS KARNATAKA STATE MINERALS CORPORATION LIMITED),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reopening of assessment in this case is bad in law. Accordingly, we quash the reassessment. ITA No.465/Bang/2020 for AY 2014-15 11. In this case, the facts are that assessment was passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 13.12.2016 making the following disallowances. (i) Penalty expenses in illegal mining areas amounting to Rs.6,92,00,000. (ii) Expenses relating

MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS KARNATAKA STATE MINERALS CORPORATION LIMITED),BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reopening of assessment in this case is bad in law. Accordingly, we quash the reassessment. ITA No.465/Bang/2020 for AY 2014-15 11. In this case, the facts are that assessment was passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 13.12.2016 making the following disallowances. (i) Penalty expenses in illegal mining areas amounting to Rs.6,92,00,000. (ii) Expenses relating

SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

reopening of an assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act shall be taken by the Assessing Officer in the case of such trust or institution for any assessment year preceding the first assessment year for which the registration applies, merely for the reason that such trust or institution has not obtained the registration under section 12AA

M/S. NITESH ESTATES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on legal issue raised in ground no

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Nitesh Estates The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of Nitesh Time Square, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, #8, M.G. Road, Circle – 5 [1][2], Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn9267C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28/03/2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Order Of Re-Assessment Is Bad In Law & Void-Ab- Initio For Want Of Requisite Jurisdiction Especially, The Mandatory Requirements To Assume Jurisdiction U/S 148 Of The Act Did Not Exist & Have Not Been Complied With & Consequently, The Re-Assessment Requires To Be Cancelled. 3. The Learned Cit[A] Ought To Have Appreciated That There Was No Fresh Material To Show That Income Had Escaped Assessment Especially When There Was A Scrutiny

Charitable Trust vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 552 & 553/Bang/2018 by order dt. 16.10.2020. Page 7 of 17 10. On the other hand, Ld.CIT.DR submitted that, the authority below was justified in reopening the assessment

M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1458 To 1462/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2013-14 Respectively

reopened the assessment by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act on 30-09-2015. It is well settled proposition of law that the provisions of the Act, which are in operation on the date of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, should apply for the initiation of proceedings. In any case, we notice that the Rajasthan High

M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1458 To 1462/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2013-14 Respectively

reopened the assessment by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act on 30-09-2015. It is well settled proposition of law that the provisions of the Act, which are in operation on the date of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, should apply for the initiation of proceedings. In any case, we notice that the Rajasthan High

M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1458 To 1462/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2013-14 Respectively

reopened the assessment by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act on 30-09-2015. It is well settled proposition of law that the provisions of the Act, which are in operation on the date of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, should apply for the initiation of proceedings. In any case, we notice that the Rajasthan High

M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1458 To 1462/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2013-14 Respectively

reopened the assessment by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act on 30-09-2015. It is well settled proposition of law that the provisions of the Act, which are in operation on the date of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, should apply for the initiation of proceedings. In any case, we notice that the Rajasthan High

M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.1458 To 1462/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2013-14 Respectively

reopened the assessment by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act on 30-09-2015. It is well settled proposition of law that the provisions of the Act, which are in operation on the date of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, should apply for the initiation of proceedings. In any case, we notice that the Rajasthan High

NVIDIA GRAPHICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee s party allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Mahadevpura Village, Central Circle – 2(4), K. R. Puram Hobli, Marathalli Bangalore. Bagmane Goldstone Building, North Tower, Mahadevpura S.O, Bangalore – 560 048. Pan : Aabcn 9200 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024

Charitable Trust v. Income-tax Officer: In this case, the Hon'bie High Court of Madras held that where assessment was sought to be reopened

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

reopening issued under section 148 of 20 March 2023 the act 6 Return filed by the assessee 6 April 2023 7 Reference made by the assessing officer for 5 March 2024 assessment year 2015 – 16, 2016 – 17 and 2019 – 20 8 Reference made by the assessing officer for 19 February 2024 assessment year 2022 – 23 9 Time limit available under

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 EXEMPTIONS , BANGALORE vs. M/S CENTRE FPR CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR PLATFORMS , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Centre For Cellular & Molecular Platforms, The Income Tax Officer (E), Post Bag No. 6505, Ward -1 , Vs. G.K.V.K. P.O. Bangalore. Bellary Road, Bangalore – 560 065. Pan: Aadcc8572D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ujjwal Kumar, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2019

reopened only for non-registration for the relevant assessment years. 30. This brings us to the next question, i.e., whether the assessment Page 10 of 11 proceeding "pending before the Assessing Officer", as stated in the first proviso to Section 12A(2) can be taken as "pending in appeal", or, in other words, whether proceedings pending in appeal