BANK OF BARODA ( ERSTWHILE VIJAYA BANK),MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of penalty levied by RBI and disallowance of sundry assets written off. Since the issues are common, we are deciding

BANK OF BARODA,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of penalty levied by RBI and disallowance of sundry assets written off. Since the issues are common, we are deciding

BANK OF BARODA,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of penalty levied by RBI and disallowance of sundry assets written off. Since the issues are common, we are deciding

SHRI. MUNINAGA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for A

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were simultaneously initiated. The assessment was completed making the following additions / disallowances

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ABB INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanshri Inturi Rama Raoita No.441 /Bang/2014 (Asst. Year 1998-99) The Jt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Ltu), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Abb India Pvt. Ltd., Khanija Bhawan, Race Course Road, Bangalore. . Respondent Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Respondent By : Shri T Suryanarayana, Advocate

penalty to the extent on disallowance of disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA in respect of 9 units was rectified and deleted

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

In the result, all 13 appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance is not a subject matter of penalty u/s 271 AAB. Before such disallowance, there is loss as claimed by the assessee

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(LTU), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2007-08

disallowances, the nomenclatures was shown to be the penalties, but it is not clear whether penalties were paid on account

IIFL SAMASTA FINANCE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

disallowance of an amount shall form the basis for imposition\nof penalty, if such addition or disallowance has formed the basis

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BALLARI vs. H R GAVIAPPA AND CO, BALLARI

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands partly allowed

disallowed the same.\nc) The assessee has been levied a penalty of Rs. 6,86,54,000/-\nthe same was treated

SHAW WALLACE DISTILLERIES LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijay Pal Raoi.T.A No.809/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2002-03) Shaw Wallace Distilleries Ltd (Since Amalgamated With United Spirits Ltd) Ub Towers, 24/1, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore 560 001 .. Appellant Pan : Aaccm8043 V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2(3), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Pradeep, Ca Revenue By : Shri. G. R. Reddy, Cit-Dr-I Heard On : 10.02.2016 Pronounced On : 19.02.2016 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

disallowed, in our opinion, penalty ought not have been levied on the said amount. 13. Coming to the disallowance of Rs.37

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S VIJAYA BANK, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

disallowance of penalty paid by the Assessee of Rs.90,94,829. The AO disallowed the claim of the Assessee for deduction

VIJAYA BANK,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

disallowance of penalty paid by the Assessee of Rs.90,94,829. The AO disallowed the claim of the Assessee for deduction

MARIS CEMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HULIYAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, TUMKUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accoutant Member

Disallowance of interest expenses – Rs.7,34,747/-. 4. Before the A.O., the assessee agreed for all the above said four additions and hence the A.O. completed the assessment accordingly. Thereafter, the A.O. initiated the ITA 1672 OF 2019 MARIS CEMENTS PVT. LTD., HULIYAR Page 3 of 12 penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, MANGALORE vs. L JAVERCHAND JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20 L. Javerchand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. No.1, 2Nd Floor & 3Rd Floor, Choksi Chamber Dcit 1Stagyari Lane Vs. Central Circle-1 Zaveri Bazar Mangaluru Mumbai 400 002

disallowance of an amount shall form the basis for imposition of penalty, if such addition or disallowance has formed the basis

ASHWATHNARAYANA SINGH AND CO ,BELLRY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BELLARY

In the result appeal is filed by assessee for year under consideration stands allowed

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

disallowance of Rs. 20,55,00,000/- (being compensatory payment made by assessee/retained from the sale proceeds by monitoring Rs. 6,34,99,500/- committee on the directions of Supreme Court for mining 3 and dumping outside lease area) made by assessing officer by holding it as penalty

M/S JAICO AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING CO.PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Jaico Automobile Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy No. 9/10, Ii Stage, Commissioner Of D.K. Industrial Area, Income Tax, Mahadevapura, Circle-11(5), Bengaluru – 560 048. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacj5640E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17-09-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillai

disallowance under section 43B: 1,88,431/-. 4. The Ld.AO levied penalty on above disallowances for concealment and furnishing inaccurate

DCIT vs. SRI. P. SUBRAMANI,

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2006-07 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

penalty amounting to Rs.10,24,846 levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was submitted that in the return of income for Assessment Year 2006-07, the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income in claiming exemption under section 54B of the Act, which claim after being disallowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU vs. RASHTROTTHANA PARISHAT, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017=18

disallowance of an amount shall form the basis for imposition of penalty, if such addition or disallowance has formed the basis