ASST.C.I.T., MANGALORE vs. DR. ALI KUMBLE, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudanshu Srivastava

depreciation are allowed to be carried forward under certain conditions. The expert Group, in the draft Income-Otax Bill, has recognized the need to encourage business reorganizations when they are in consonance with the objective of economic development and are not merely device to secure tax advantage." 10.3. Thus the bill proposes to allow tax benefits in case of business

ASST.C.I.T., MANGALORE vs. DR. ALI KUMBLE, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudanshu Srivastava

depreciation are allowed to be carried forward under certain conditions. The expert Group, in the draft Income-Otax Bill, has recognized the need to encourage business reorganizations when they are in consonance with the objective of economic development and are not merely device to secure tax advantage." 10.3. Thus the bill proposes to allow tax benefits in case of business

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

K. G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

undisclosed ITA Nos.307 to 312/Bang/2020 Shri K.G. Krishna, Bangalore Page 47 of 89 income or property discovered in the course of search. The argument of the Ld. Counsel is that in this assessment year, notice to issue u/s 143(2) was already lapsed as on the date of search, no assessment could be made without basis of incriminating material found

M/S. GMR KAMALAGA ENERGY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. GMR KAMALNGA ENERGY LTD,, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LTD, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. GMR KAMALNGA ENERGY LTD, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation and not allowable as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from business. 2. The Appellant has incurred the expenses of Rs.31,60,275/- for the purpose of business. In the event the expenses are not allowed as deduction under section 37 while computing the income under the head income from the business

M/S. BRINDAVAN PHOSPHATES PVT. LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Inturi Rama Rao & Shri. Lalit Kumar

undisclosed property or income was recovered during the course of search, the AO could not make any addition in respect 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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Depreciation 1,53,05,869 Balance 31,53,10,883 Add: Loss from redemption of mutual funds 8,65,293 Add: Maintenance expenses towards Benz Car 3,47,192 Taxable Income 31,65,23,368 Add: Long Term Capital gain as ROA 4,31,496 Total Taxable Income 31,69,54,864 9. Consequently, on the basis of search

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Depreciation 1,53,05,869 Balance 31,53,10,883 Add: Loss from redemption of mutual funds 8,65,293 Add: Maintenance expenses towards Benz Car 3,47,192 Taxable Income 31,65,23,368 Add: Long Term Capital gain as ROA 4,31,496 Total Taxable Income 31,69,54,864 9. Consequently, on the basis of search