M/S. CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Charitable Trust (supra) held that no hard and fast rule can be laid down in the matter of condonation of delay and the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach and the Court should exercise their discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression "sufficient cause" the principle of advancing substantial justice

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

Section\n153D. It is not an exercise dealing with a immaterial matter which\ncould be corrected by taking recourse to Section 292B of the Act.\n16. We are not inclined to interdict the order of the Tribunal.\n17. Accordingly, the appeal is closed.\n6.5 The above view taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT

SHRI RAJESH AJJAVARA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

1) or (2) of Section 139 of the Act relying upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable & Chaleswar Temple Trust Vs. CIT. Judgement. 3.2 In this context, it is submitted by the Assessing Officer that the provisions of section 271

SHRI RAJESH AJJAVARA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

1) or (2) of Section 139 of the Act relying upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable & Chaleswar Temple Trust Vs. CIT. Judgement. 3.2 In this context, it is submitted by the Assessing Officer that the provisions of section 271

SHRI RAJESH AJJAVARA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

1) or (2) of Section 139 of the Act relying upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable & Chaleswar Temple Trust Vs. CIT. Judgement. 3.2 In this context, it is submitted by the Assessing Officer that the provisions of section 271

SHRI RAJESH AJJAVARA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

1) or (2) of Section 139 of the Act relying upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable & Chaleswar Temple Trust Vs. CIT. Judgement. 3.2 In this context, it is submitted by the Assessing Officer that the provisions of section 271

M/S. ADARSH VIDYA KENDRA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, the principle is applicable with reference to the other provisions also which are penal in nature. Cancellation of registration deprives the assessee of the various benefits which otherwise accrue and hence the provisions are to be considered as in the nature of punishment. 4.5 The ld. A.R. submitted that, the order passed

M/S. AMALA JYOTHI VIDYA KENDRA TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, the principle is applicable with reference to the other provisions also which are penal in nature. Cancellation of registration deprives the assessee of the various benefits which otherwise accrue and hence the provisions are to be considered as in the nature of punishment. 4.5 The ld. A.R. submitted that, the order passed

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

Charitable Trust CIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT Lucknow / (20161 49 ITR Trib) 276 held that it is settled position of law that any evidence collected at the back of the assessee cannot be used adversely unless and until it is confronted to the assessee and the assessee is allowed to cross-examine the witness

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

Charitable Trust CIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT Lucknow / (20161 49 ITR Trib) 276 held that it is settled position of law that any evidence collected at the back of the assessee cannot be used adversely unless and until it is confronted to the assessee and the assessee is allowed to cross-examine the witness

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

Charitable Trust CIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT Lucknow / (20161 49 ITR Trib) 276 held that it is settled position of law that any evidence collected at the back of the assessee cannot be used adversely unless and until it is confronted to the assessee and the assessee is allowed to cross-examine the witness

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

Charitable Trust CIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT Lucknow / (20161 49 ITR Trib) 276 held that it is settled position of law that any evidence collected at the back of the assessee cannot be used adversely unless and until it is confronted to the assessee and the assessee is allowed to cross-examine the witness

M/S. AMALA JYOTHI VIDYA KENDRA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2021-22

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, the principle is applicable with reference to the other provisions also which are penal in nature. Cancellation of registration deprives the assessee of the various benefits which otherwise accrue and hence the provisions are to be considered as in the nature of punishment. M/s. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust, Bangalore M/s. Adarsh Vidya

M/S. ADARSH VIDYA KENDRA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2021-22

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, the principle is applicable with reference to the other provisions also which are penal in nature. Cancellation of registration deprives the assessee of the various benefits which otherwise accrue and hence the provisions are to be considered as in the nature of punishment. M/s. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust, Bangalore M/s. Adarsh Vidya

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

271(1)(c) of the Act; 8. The Learned AO has erred in law and on facts in levying interest under section 2346 of the Act; 9. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, the order of the Learned AO, Bangalore, to the extent upheld by the CIT(A), may be set aside

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

271(1)(c) of the Act; 8. The Learned AO has erred in law and on facts in levying interest under section 2346 of the Act; 9. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, the order of the Learned AO, Bangalore, to the extent upheld by the CIT(A), may be set aside

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED , BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

271(1)(c) of the Act; 8. The Learned AO has erred in law and on facts in levying interest under section 2346 of the Act; 9. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, the order of the Learned AO, Bangalore, to the extent upheld by the CIT(A), may be set aside

BHARATHI EDUCATION TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE- 1, BANGALORE

Accordingly the appeal of assessee stands allowed on ground

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

trust registered under 12A and entitled for exemption under section 11 for the relevant year under consideration. It had filed its return of income declaring ‘nil’ Page 3 of 9 income as the application of funds for charitable purposes exceeded the total receipts. The assessee incurred capital expenditure to the extent of Rs.56,46,98,998/- and claimed depreciation