B M MANJUNATHA GUPTA ,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, , SHIVAMOGGA

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2012-13

section 271 of the Act has not been complied with, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. Without prejudice to the above though not conceding for the sake of argument, the penalty levied is highly excessive and liable to be reduced substantially, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 12. The appellant craves leave to add, alter

SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/-\n| 27.06.2016\n| 5\n| 2017-18\n| 1,36,44,128/-\n| 05.08.2017\n| 6\n| 2018-19\n| 4,08,02,040/--139(4)\n| 18.03.2019\n| 7\n| 2019-20\n| 1,01,56,742/-\n| 16.08.2019\n\n4.1 Subsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360

SHRI. G K RAVI,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/-\n27.06.2016\n5\n2017-18\n1,36,44,128/-\n05.08.2017\n6\n2018-19\n4,08,02,040/--139(4)\n18.03.2019\n7\n2019-20\n1,01,56,742/-\n16.08.2019\n4.1 Subsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices u/s.153C

SHRI. G K RAVI,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/- | 27.06.2016 |\n| 5 | 2017-18 | 1,36,44,128/- | 05.08.2017 |\n| 6 | 2018-19 | 4,08,02,040/--139(4) | 18.03.2019 |\n| 7 | 2019-20 | 1,01,56,742/- | 16.08.2019 |\n\n4.1 Subsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices

SHRI. VIRUPAXAPPA SIDDAPPA UDNUR,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 234D of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted on which interest is levied are all not discernible and are wrong on the facts of the case. The Appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Income Tax 6. Appellate Tribunal to add, alter, delete or substitute

GOTTIGERE KRISHNAPPA RAVI,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/-\n27.06.2016\n5\n2017-18\n1,36,44,128/-\n05.08.2017\n6\n2018-19\n4,08,02,040/--139(4)\n18.03.2019\n7\n2019-20\n1,01,56,742/-\n16.08.2019\n4.1\nSubsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices u/s.153C

SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/-\n27.06.2016\n5\n2017-18\n1,36,44,128/-\n05.08.2017\n6\n2018-19\n4,08,02,040/--139(4)\n18.03.2019\n7\n2019-20\n1,01,56,742/-\n16.08.2019\n4.1\nSubsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices u/s.153C

SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/- | 27.06.2016 |\n| 5 | 2017-18 | 1,36,44,128/- | 05.08.2017 |\n| 6 | 2018-19 | 4,08,02,040/--139(4) | 18.03.2019 |\n| 7 | 2019-20 | 1,01,56,742/- | 16.08.2019 |\n\n4.1 Subsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices

SHRI. G. K RAVI ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

96,491/-\n27.06.2016\n5\n2017-18\n1,36,44,128/-\n05.08.2017\n6\n2018-19\n4,08,02,040/--139(4)\n18.03.2019\n7\n2019-20\n1,01,56,742/-\n16.08.2019\n\n4.1 Subsequent to centralization of the appellant's case vide PCIT-4,\nBengaluru in F.No. 45/Centl.Notfn./PCIT-4/2019-20/360 dated 02.07.2019 to\nDCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore, notices u/s.153C

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

96 taxmann.com 652 (SC ii) CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation (2001) 116 Taxman 608 (SC) iii) Sri Shridevi Charitable Trust v. DCIT(E) in ITA No.226/Bang/2022 dated 10.6.2022. 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(Appeals) and CPC. He submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has not condoned the delay is correct view. The assessee should

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

96 taxmann.com 652 (SC ii) CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation (2001) 116 Taxman 608 (SC) iii) Sri Shridevi Charitable Trust v. DCIT(E) in ITA No.226/Bang/2022 dated 10.6.2022. 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(Appeals) and CPC. He submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has not condoned the delay is correct view. The assessee should

BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2009-10 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Dcit, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Bmtc Complex, Circle – 11(2), K H Road, Shanti Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 027. Pan : Aaacb 4881 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. A. Shankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’), relating to Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The impugned order of CIT(A) was received on 22/03/2013 and the appeal ought to have been preferred within 60 days of receipt of the order of the CIT(A) i.e., on or before 21.05.2013. The appeal was filed only

BIJU PAPPACHAN,KERALA vs. AO, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

96,413/- and claimed deduction of Rs. 7,19,063/- u/s 10(10) of the Act on account of death cum retirement Gratuity and Rs. 15,25,689/- u/s 10(10A) of the Act on account of commuted Biju Pappachan, Kollam Page 11 of 14 value of pension received. However, as the assessee had neither furnished any reply nor documentary

MADAPURA vs. SBN,KODAGUVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MADIKERI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condone the delay by exercising powers under section 249(3) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Grounds on disallowance of 8oP deduction, Rs.3i,66,632/-: a. The authorities below have erred in denying the deduction claimed under section 8oP of the Act though the appellant is lawfully eligible, on the facts and circumstances

BHASKAR REDDY NANDYALA HANUMANTHA REDDYGARI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

section 144B of the Income-tax Act on 23/03/2022 suffers from serious factual errors and addition to income being made without recording proper reasons for such additions. 5. For these grounds and such other grounds that may be adduced before or during the hearing Of the appeal, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased

BHASKAR REDDY NANDYALA HANUMANTHA REDDYGARI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

section 144B of the Income-tax Act on 23/03/2022 suffers from serious factual errors and addition to income being made without recording proper reasons for such additions. 5. For these grounds and such other grounds that may be adduced before or during the hearing Of the appeal, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased

BHASKAR REDDY NANDYALA HANUMANTHA REDDYGARI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

section 144B of the Income-tax Act on 23/03/2022 suffers from serious factual errors and addition to income being made without recording proper reasons for such additions. 5. For these grounds and such other grounds that may be adduced before or during the hearing Of the appeal, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased

MUSTAFA KHALEEL,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

96, inter alia provides that income-tax shall not be levied on any award or agreement made (except those made under section 46) under - -the RFCTLARR Act. Therefore, compensation received for compulsory acquisition of land under the RFCTLARR Act [except those made under section 46 of RFCTLARR Act], is exempted from the levy of income-tax. 2.14 Hence, the assessee

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

condone this inordinate delay of 1694 days and the appeal is dismissed unadmitted. Accordingly, we decline to admit the appeal and dismiss the appeal in limine. IT(TP)A No.296, 468 & 1119/Bang/2015 IT(TP)A No.621 & 694/Bang/2016, IT(TP)A No.1674/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.582/Bang/2021 Page 7 of 34 ITA No.468/Bang/2015 (A.Y. 2010-11) (Assessee’s appeal):- 4. Grounds urged