M/S SHETTY CONSTRUCTIONS ,KALABURAGI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-(1), KALABURAGI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodiaita No.286(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Shetty Constructions, Shetty Enclave, Aland Road, Kalaburagi-585 103 Panno.Aaffs1811G Appellant Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-(1), Kalaburagi Respondent Appellant By : Shri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manjeet Singh, Addl.Cit

depreciation was also claimed on this asset. This fact was not disputed by the assessee. The Shah Bazar Site was not at all shown in the balance sheet. All the constructions under consideration, including the Fun Junction Multiplex which was classified as fixed asset in the balance sheet of the assessee, were built on this site only. There is nothing

M/S. MANGALORE ROUND TABLE TRUST,MANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodiaita No.286(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Shetty Constructions, Shetty Enclave, Aland Road, Kalaburagi-585 103 Panno.Aaffs1811G Appellant Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-(1), Kalaburagi Respondent Appellant By : Shri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manjeet Singh, Addl.Cit

depreciation was also claimed on this asset. This fact was not disputed by the assessee. The Shah Bazar Site was not at all shown in the balance sheet. All the constructions under consideration, including the Fun Junction Multiplex which was classified as fixed asset in the balance sheet of the assessee, were built on this site only. There is nothing

M/S. KHODAY INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Khoday India Ltd., The Income-Tax 7Th Mile, Brewery House, Officer, Kanakapura Road, Ward 4 (1)(2), Bangalore – 560 062. Bangalore. Pan: Aaack6734C Vs. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Sridhar, Ca : Shri Ramesh B.R., Addl. Cit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 09/12/2021 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2015-16 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Bengaluru-11, Bengaluru In Ita No.Cit(A)- 11/Bng/Tr.10036/2018-19 (Din: Itba /Apl /M/ 250 /2021-22/ 1037634908(1) Dated:09.12.2021 Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities & Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Passed U/S.154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated:14.02.2018. 3. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Erred In Not Directing The Assessing Officer To Set Off The Entire

69A or section 69C or section 69D." Page 10 of 11 The intention of the legislature in introducing the amendment, as stated in the explanatory note, is to avoid unnecessary litigation and to expressly provide that no set off of any loss shall be allowable in respect of income under section 68. Therefore, it has to be held that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD , BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012 – 13

69A without proper appreciation of the explanation offered by the appellant is bad in law and should be deleted. 10. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) - 14, Bangalore has erred in confirming the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234D of the Act. On facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable, interest under section

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

sections": [ "132(4)", "153A", "143(2)", "153C", "153D", "69", "115BBE", "234B", "234D", "40A(3)", "142(1)", "69A" ], "issues": "Whether disallowance of depreciation

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

sections": [ "132(4)", "153A", "143(3)", "153C", "153D", "69", "115BBE", "234B", "234D", "131", "40A(3)", "142(1)", "69A" ], "issues": "Whether disallowance of depreciation

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 1, BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. GLOBAL TECH PARK PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

sections": [ "132(4)", "153A", "143(2)", "40a(ia)", "153C", "153D", "143(3)", "69", "115BBE", "234B", "234D", "40A(3)", "142(1)", "69A" ], "issues": "Whether disallowance of depreciation

M/S. TOYOTA TAUSHO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(1)(1), BENGALURU

Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

depreciation that means it has been put to use and capital expenses should be treated as operating in nature. In this regard, the assessee could not give any satisfactory answer. In the opinion of the AO, he also noted from the computation of income that no such adjustment was made by the assessee. Accordingly, he noted that two different opinions

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

depreciation on luxury cars which is identical to appeal of the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2015-16 wherein we have directed the ld. AO to delete the disallowance. For similar reasons, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disallowance for this year too. Accordingly ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed. 50. Ground no 3 is dismissed

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

depreciation on luxury cars which is identical to appeal of the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2015-16 wherein we have directed the ld. AO to delete the disallowance. For similar reasons, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disallowance for this year too. Accordingly ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed. 50. Ground no 3 is dismissed

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

depreciation on luxury cars which is identical to appeal of the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2015-16 wherein we have directed the ld. AO to delete the disallowance. For similar reasons, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disallowance for this year too. Accordingly ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed. 50. Ground no 3 is dismissed

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

depreciation on luxury cars which is identical to appeal of the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2015-16 wherein we have directed the ld. AO to delete the disallowance. For similar reasons, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disallowance for this year too. Accordingly ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed. 50. Ground no 3 is dismissed

KOGOD BASAVARAJU JAYACHANDRA ,HASSAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result the ITA No

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed;] 31[(ca) where a return of income has not been furnished by the assessee or a return of income has been furnished by him and on the basis of information or document received from the prescribed income-tax authority, under sub-section (2) of section 133C

WISDOM EDUCATION TRUST(R),MYSURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MYSURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 69A of the Act, disallowances of depreciation, disallowances of salary paid to employees, disallowances of vehicle maintenance, interest paid

WISDOM EDUCATION TRUST (R),MYSURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS , MYSURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 69A of the Act, disallowances of depreciation, disallowances of salary paid to employees, disallowances of vehicle maintenance, interest paid

CHANDRASHEKAR HEMANTH ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(2)(4) BANGALORE, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

69A of the Act. The AO stated that the assessee had made a claim of setting off of brought forward losses of Rs. 45,18,838/- which was originally accepted by the CPC while processing the return. Now the AO made an allegation that the assessee is not entitled for set off the above said losses for the reason that

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

69A, 69B & 69D of the Act have not been invoked in the assessment order and also erred in law and ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 2 of 11 facts in holding that section 154 of the Act is not applicable. In addition to this, assessee is challenging the non-granting of depreciation

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

69A, 69B & 69D of the Act have not been invoked in the assessment order and also erred in law and ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 2 of 11 facts in holding that section 154 of the Act is not applicable. In addition to this, assessee is challenging the non-granting of depreciation