ITTINA PROPERTIES PVT., LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Ittina Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Additional No.380, Opp. Cpwd Quarters, Commissioner Of Income Vs. Iii Block, Koramangala, Tax, Bengaluru. Range-Ii, Pan No : Aaaci 3805 Q Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Deepak Chopra, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Mathivanan, Cit(Dr)(Itat) Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2021

C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Ittina Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Additional No.380, Opp. CPWD Quarters, Commissioner of Income Vs. III Block, Koramangala, Tax, Bengaluru. Range-II, PAN NO : AAACI 3805 Q Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri. Deepak Chopra, CA Respondent by : Shri. Mathivanan

M/S NAMDHARI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2001-02

c) If the agricultural income is assessed as business income then eligible deduction U/s. 801B be granted and d) interest levied be deleted.” Brief facts of the present appeal are as under: 2. At the outset, it is necessary to record the brief history of the present appeal which is as under: 1. Ld.AO passed the original assessment order under

S N BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. S.N.Builders & Developers, No.4, 2Nd Floor, Elephant Rock Road, Above Kalayan Jewellers, Jayanagar 3Rd Block, Bengaluru-560 011. Pan: Abefs 8850 P … Appellant Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 4(3)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Smt. Suman Lunkar, Ca. Respondent By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/11/2019 O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm : The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Bangalore-9, Bangalore, Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 ['The Act' For Short].

C’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. S.N.Builders & Developers, No.4, 2nd floor, Elephant Rock Road, Above Kalayan Jewellers, Jayanagar 3rd Block, Bengaluru-560 011. PAN: ABEFS 8850 P … Appellant Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 4(3)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant by : Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA. Respondent by : Shri

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. PURVANKARA PROJECTS LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.347 & 348/Bang/2021 Assessment years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/s. Purvankara Projects Ltd., of Income Tax, No.130/1, Ulsoor Road, Central Circle 1(2), Bengaluru – 560 042. PAN: AAACP 2550R Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. PURVANKARA PROJECTS LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.347 & 348/Bang/2021 Assessment years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/s. Purvankara Projects Ltd., of Income Tax, No.130/1, Ulsoor Road, Central Circle 1(2), Bengaluru – 560 042. PAN: AAACP 2550R Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

M/S. JEANS KNIT PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13

C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.21-E1, 2nd Phase, Income-tax, Industrial Area, Peenya, Circle-4(1)(1), Bengaluru-560 058. Bengaluru. PAN – AABCJ 4513 B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

10 of 89 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing officer to the extent of 50 percent of the expenditure debited to the profit and loss account amounting to Rs. 8,50,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not justify the expenditure claimed. The conclusion of authorities below being wholly