KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

condoning the short delay of 41 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the same for adjudication. 7. Now coming to the brief facts of the case are that the assessee Trust e-filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 belatedly u/s 139(4) of the Act on 18.1.2018 declaring nil income after

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoned and the appeal of the assesses are admitted. 8. The solitary issue in this appeal is that assessee is an individual assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 6 February 2020 at a total income of ₹ 24,483,310/– showing income from house property, income from business and income from other

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoned and the appeal of the assesses are admitted. 8. The solitary issue in this appeal is that assessee is an individual assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 6 February 2020 at a total income of ₹ 24,483,310/– showing income from house property, income from business and income from other

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COASTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the four A

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K. (Judicial Member)

AC SGST 2024-TIOL-1952-\nHC-KERALA-GST (para 5)\nM/s. Mfar Holdings Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT ITA No.\n1931/Bang/2017 dated 25-10-2023 (para 7)\nAaryan Motels 88 Taxmann.com 7 Agra (para 12 &\n13)\nBarnala Steel Industries 74 ITR TRI SN 83 Delhi\n(para 12 & 13)\nNR TMT (India) Pvt. Ltd. [TS-32-ITAT-2025(RAI)]\nReference\nCLI

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. YASHA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NI,RAICHUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , RAICHUR

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2019-20

Ac, the time limit to file appeal before this Tribunal is 60 days of the date on which order sought to be appealed served to the assessee or to the Principal CIT as the case may be. Thus, the normal time limit available is 60 days from the date of receipt of the order of the CIT(A). However

KANCHI PERIYAVA TRUST-MYSORE,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BENGALAURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

1. The order of rejection for approval under section 80G of the Act passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemptions], Bengaluru dated 23/03/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, requires to be quashed. 2. The learned Principal Commissioner

KANCHI PERIYAVA TRUST-MYSORE ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

1. The order of rejection for approval under section 80G of the Act passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemptions], Bengaluru dated 23/03/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, requires to be quashed. 2. The learned Principal Commissioner

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

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

AC SGST 2024-TIOL-1952-\nHC-KERALA-GST (para 5)\nM/s. Mfar Holdings Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT ITA No.\n1931/Bang/2017 dated 25-10-2023 (para 7)\nAaryan Motels 88 Taxmann.com 7 Agra (para 12 &\n13)\nBarnala Steel Industries 74 ITR TRI SN 83 Delhi\n(para 12 & 13)\nNR TMT (India) Pvt. Ltd. [TS-32-ITAT-2025(RAI)]\n\nReference

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

AC SGST 2024-TIOL-1952-\nHC-KERALA-GST (para 5)\nM/s. Mfar Holdings Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT ITA No.\n1931/Bang/2017 dated 25-10-2023 (para 7)\nAaryan Motels 88 Taxmann.com 7 Agra (para 12 &\n13)\nBarnala Steel Industries 74 ITR TRI SN 83 Delhi\n(para 12 & 13)\nNR TMT (India) Pvt. Ltd. [TS-32-ITAT-2025(RAI)]\nReference\nCLI

ANJAPPAR CHETTINAD AC RESTAURANT,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

AC ITO, Vs. Restaurant - Bangalore, Ward – 1(2)(1), 100 Ft Road, Indira Nagar, BMTC Building, Bengaluru-560 038. Bengaluru. PAN : AAZFA 0846 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. V. Padmanaban, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 14.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2022 O R D E R ITA No.393Bang/2022 is an appeal

ANJAPPAR CHETTINAD AC RESTAURANT,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

AC ITO, Vs. Restaurant - Bangalore, Ward – 1(2)(1), 100 Ft Road, Indira Nagar, BMTC Building, Bengaluru-560 038. Bengaluru. PAN : AAZFA 0846 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. V. Padmanaban, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 14.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2022 O R D E R ITA No.393Bang/2022 is an appeal

SHRI SADGURU NIRUPADESHWARA NITYA DASOHA CHARITABLE TRUST ANKALIMATH,MAKAPUR, LINGASURU TQ AND RAICHUR DIST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION WARD-1,KALBURGI, KALBURGI,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

12. Accordingly, the delay in filling appeal is on account of bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant trust and not on account of negligence on the part of the appellant. Hence, we humbly pray that delay be condoned in view of the peculiar circumstances and facts narrated above and in the interest of the justice. 13. That

SHRI SADGURU NIRUPADESHWARA NITYA DASOHA CHARITABLE TRUST ANKALIMATH,MUDGAL, LINGASURU TQ RAICHUR DIST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION WARD-1,KALBURGI, KALBURGI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

12. Accordingly, the delay in filling appeal is on account of bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant trust and not on account of negligence on the part of the appellant. Hence, we humbly pray that delay be condoned in view of the peculiar circumstances and facts narrated above and in the interest of the justice. 13. That