KOME KORAVADI VIVIDODDESHA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, UDUPI

3) of the Act vide\norder dated 14-12-2018 wherein the deduction claimed under section\n80P of the Act was disallowed and income was assessed at Rs.\n11,64,663/- only. Against the said assessment, the assessee preferred\nan appeal before the learned CIT(A).\n3.1\nSubsequently, the order under section 263 of the Act was passed\nproposing

SRI SRINIVASA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 11 of the Act, the capital expenses may be considered as application of income. However, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the payments were made to individuals without . ITA No.1075 & 1076/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 20 sufficient proof that these were incurred for charitable purposes. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's disallowance

SRI SRINIVASA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 11 of the Act, the capital expenses may be considered as application of income. However, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the payments were made to individuals without . ITA No.1075 & 1076/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 20 sufficient proof that these were incurred for charitable purposes. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's disallowance

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

disallowances made by the AO were deleted, and the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 11 was upheld.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 11", "Section 13(8)", "Section 2(15)", "Section 43B", "Section 234A", "Section 234B", "Section 143(3

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU vs. CMR JNANADHARA TRUST, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

11 of 23 As per the aforesaid paragraph 28.6 of the aforesaid Circular, where such a trust contravenes the provisions of section 13(1)(c) or 13(1)(d) of the Act the maximum Marginal rate of income-tax will apply only to that part of income, with has forfeited exemption under the said provisions.” XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Payment made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU vs. CMR JNANADHARA TRUST, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

11 of 23 As per the aforesaid paragraph 28.6 of the aforesaid Circular, where such a trust contravenes the provisions of section 13(1)(c) or 13(1)(d) of the Act the maximum Marginal rate of income-tax will apply only to that part of income, with has forfeited exemption under the said provisions.” XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Payment made

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

disallowance under section 43B cannot be\nmade in the process of computing the total income under\nsection 11 to 13 including under section 13(8).\n4.2 The learned AO and CIT(A) erred in not appreciating\nthat Explanation 3

DODDABALLAPUR PLANNING AUTHORITY,BANGALORE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowed as the appellant assessee failed to file Form 9A within the due date. (ii) Section 11(1) explicitly mandates the filing of Form 9A for the accumulation of income for the charitable purpose to ensure transparency and accountability in the utilization of fund for charitable activities. ITA Nos.2115 & 2116/Bang/2024 Doddaballapur Planning Authority, Doddaballapur Page

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

section 132A. 50.3 Applicability-These\namendments will take effect from the 1st day of June, 2007.\"\n\n6.2 From the perusal of the section 153D of the Act read with the CBDT\nCircular No. 3 of 2008, dated 12-3-2008, the legislative intent can be gathered\nso far as that the legislature in its highest wisdom made it compulsory

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

disallowances made on the merits. However, the learned\nCIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeals on both the counts.\n7. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee\nis in appeal before us.\n8. Before us, the assessee has raised the issue of assessment order\nbeing barred by time and consequently argued that the assessment\norder

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

11) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have observed that the disallowance, if any, under Sec.40A(3) ought to have been determined by reckoning the ultimate beneficiary in respect of the payments towards transportation charges, namely the respective truck drivers and not the union leaders / representatives who merely accepted the payments on behalf of the truck drivers

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

11) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have observed that the disallowance, if any, under Sec.40A(3) ought to have been determined by reckoning the ultimate beneficiary in respect of the payments towards transportation charges, namely the respective truck drivers and not the union leaders / representatives who merely accepted the payments on behalf of the truck drivers

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

11) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have observed that the disallowance, if any, under Sec.40A(3) ought to have been determined by reckoning the ultimate beneficiary in respect of the payments towards transportation charges, namely the respective truck drivers and not the union leaders / representatives who merely accepted the payments on behalf of the truck drivers

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)

disallowance under Section 14A can be made\ntowards the interest expenditure where the Appellant's\ninterest-free funds exceed its interest-free investments.\nFor the above Grounds and for such other Grounds which\nmay be allowed by the Honourable Members to be urged\nat the time of hearing, it is prayed that the aforesaid\nappeal be allowed.”\n Assessment Year

R. SRINIVAS RAJU,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

3) of the Act and therefore the Assessing Officer was justified in invoking the provisions of section in disallowing the claim to the extent of 20%. 10 6. The assessee has also raised additional ground regarding the enhancement of disallowance made by the CIT (Appeals) on account of the additional compensation of Rs.68.80 lakhs on account of the additional compensation

M/S. HICAL INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), RANGE- 1, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2016-17

3) dated 28/12/2018 by making disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] in respect of interest paid amounting to Rs. 78,11

M/S. MOBILY INFOTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2016-17

3) dated 28/12/2018 by making disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] in respect of interest paid amounting to Rs. 78,11

M/S BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

3. time of hearing, the appellant prays that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) to the extent prejudicial to the appellant be quashed or in the alternative the aforesaid grounds be allowed. 4. Disallowance under section 14A of the Act r.w.r. 8D(2)(ii) of Rules – only for Assessment Year 2008-09 and under Rule