RAGIGUDDA SRI PRASANNA ANJANEYA SWAMY BHAKTA MANDALI TRUST,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2. (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee for both the years are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

disallowance of set-off of brought forward excess application from earlier years as follows: The explanation (5) was introduced to section 11 only by o Finance Act, 2021 where the set-off was not permitted w.e.f 1 April 2021. Explanation 5.—For the purposes of this sub-section, it is hereby clarified that the calculation of income required

RAGIGUDDA SRI PRASANNA ANJANEYA SWAMY BHAKTA MANDALI TRUST,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2. (EXEMPTION) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee for both the years are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

disallowance of set-off of brought forward excess application from earlier years as follows: The explanation (5) was introduced to section 11 only by o Finance Act, 2021 where the set-off was not permitted w.e.f 1 April 2021. Explanation 5.—For the purposes of this sub-section, it is hereby clarified that the calculation of income required

M/S. H M V EDUCATIONAL CULTURAL & SOCIAL TRUST, ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER[EXEMPTIONS], WARD-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

12A(1)(ba) of the Act within the due date as prescribed under section 139(4A) of the I.T. Act. During the year, there was a loss for the impugned assessment year and she also submitted that the CPC is not justified for making disallowance

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Karnataka Chinmaya The Deputy Seva Trust, Commissioner Of Chinmaya Mission, Income-Tax C.M.H. Road, Vs. (Exemptions), Indiranagar, Circle – 1, Bengaluru – 560 038. Bengaluru. Pan: Aaatk0797Q Appellant Respondent

disallowing the exemption claimed by the assessee under section 11 of the Act on the ground that the return of income was not filed within the time as provided under section 139(4A) of the Act. Page 2 of 4 3. In the present case, the assessee filed the return of income dated 15 March 2019 in response

M/S. VIJAYANAGAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

12A(1) (ba) were introduced with effect from 1/4/2018 and therefore for the impugned assessment year., the ld CIT E could not have cancelled the registration u/s 12 A of the Truste by invoking Provision of section 12 AA (4) of the Act. Further mere delay in filing the return of income cannot be construed as a violation so grave

SHRI. BHADRESHWAR EDUCATION AND SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST,BIJAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 EXEMPTION , GULBARGA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2021-22

ba) of the Act provides that the exemption u/s. 11 of the Act can be availed only if the return of income was filed in the manner prescribed under the provisions of section 139(4A) of the Act which in turns requires that an assessee claiming exemption u/s.11 of the Act to file the return of income within

GRAMA VIDYODAYA SANGHA (REGD),MYSURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2018-19

BA (affiliated to University of Mysore) at T.Narasipur. However, it M/s. Grama Vidyodaya Sangha (Regd), Mysuru Page 3 of 11 was not registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee got registered u/s 12AA of the Act on 31.01.2020 relevant to A.Y. 2020-21. 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year

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

ba) where the assessee has failed to furnish a report in respect of any international transaction which he was so required under section 92E;] (c) where an assessment has been made, but— (i) income chargeable to tax has been underassessed ; or (ii) such income has been assessed at too low a rate30 ; or (iii) such income has been made

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

In the result the ITA No

ba) where the assessee has failed to furnish a report in respect of any\ninternational transaction which he was so required under section 92E;]\n\n(c) where an assessment has been made, but—\n(i) income chargeable to tax has been underassessed ; or\n(ii) such income has been assessed at too low a rate30 ; or\n(iii) such

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in above\nterms

disallowance\nof interest at para NO. 9.2, 9.3 & 9.4 of his order but while assessing the income\nthere is no addition made on the assessed income, hence, we will not adjudicate\nthis ground No. 9 on this issue.\n\nAggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A).\nThe legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

disallowance\nof interest at para NO. 9.2, 9.3 & 9.4 of his order but while assessing the income\nthere is no addition made on the assessed income, hence, we will not adjudicate\nthis ground No. 9 on this issue.\nAggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A).\nThe legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section

VEERENDRA KUMAR PATIL,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

disallowance of interest at para NO. 9.2, 9.3 & 9.4 of his order but while assessing the income there is no addition made on the assessed income, ,hence, we will not adjudicate this ground No. 9 on this issue. 5. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

disallowance of interest aws not added Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment on 24.03.2022. ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 10 of 29 6. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, approval under section 151 of the Act and date of issue

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

disallowance of interest aws not added Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment on 24.03.2022. ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 10 of 29 6. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, approval under section 151 of the Act and date of issue

SMT. NISHITA NANDISH ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

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

disallowance of interest aws not added Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment on 24.03.2022. ITA Nos.1614 to 1616/Bang/2024 Page 10 of 29 6. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The legal grounds challenging the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, approval under section 151 of the Act and date of issue