GOBINDRAM CHANDRAMANI VIVEK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

4). It was submitted that section 54 clearly stipulates that for claiming deduction under Section 54 wherein the amount is not so utilized prior to the due date as prescribed u/s 139(1) for purchasing the new residential house property

M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. This agreement cannot, therefore, be said to be in the nature of a contract referred to in section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. It cannot, therefore, be said that the provisions of section 2(47)(v) will apply in the situation before us. Considering the facts and circumstances

SREENIVASULU SAGALETI,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year :2018-19

property on 14.06.2017, the net consideration from the sale was not utilized towards acquisition or construction of a new residential house as provided in section 54F(1) of the Act by the by the date of filing of return of income. Accordingly, assessee was required under section 54F(4

M/S CESSNA GARDEN DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11

house property is required to be treated as business income u/s. 28, then the consequences as mentioned in chapter D for profit and gains of the business profit under chapter 4 computation of business income shall be available including the provisions of section

DEV KUMAR ROY ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

house property’. The statutory provision reads as follows:- “Section:54F: (1) Subject to the provisions of sub- section (4), where

M/S. MUKKA PROTEINS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOW AS MUKKA SEA FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., ),MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , MANGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

House, First Cross Central Circle-1 Vs. N.G. Road, Attavar Mangaluru Mangaluru 575 001 Karnataka PAN NO : AAGCM8310E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 22.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 03.07.2024 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals by assessee are for the assessment years

SRI. MARUTHIVANDITH REDDY MANNUR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

houses of the managing\ndirector and other directors. In such a case, when the\nmanaging director or any other persons were found to be not\nin possession of any incriminating material, the question of\nexamining them by the authorised officer during the course of\nsearch and recording any statement from them by invoking the\npowers under section 132(4

SRI. MARUTHIVANDITH REDDY MANNUR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

houses of the managing\ndirector and other directors. In such a case, when the\nmanaging director or any other persons were found to be not\nin possession of any incriminating material, the question of\nexamining them by the authorised officer during the course of\nsearch and recording any statement from them by invoking the\npowers under section 132(4

M/S. ADARSH VIDYA KENDRA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

House and residential institution for the\nstudents and those connected with the institution.\n(v) To invest, dispose or transfer and otherwise deal\nwith the subject-matter of the Trust in such manner as\nthe Trustees should deem fit so as to enable the Trust to\non the objects of the Trust effectively.\n(vi) 'To accept donation, grants, presents

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BANGALORE

4,40,00,000/- 28,98,05,363/- 2021-22\n47,29,00,000/- 15,85,90,000/- 63,14,90,000/- Sub-Total\n115,40,37,713/- 30,01,23,000/- 145,41,60,713/- Total funds transferred from charitable trust, RECT to\n145,41,60,713/- trustees (Amount in Rs.)\n6.1.1 The assessee trust has furnished a detailed

S.M. CHANDRASHEKAR,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

4) of the Act if the property referred to in sub- section 2 consists of more than one house the provisions

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

4,40,00,000/-\n28,98,05,363/-\n2021-22\n47,29,00,000/- 15,85,90,000/- 63,14,90,000/-\nSub-Total\n115,40,37,713/- 30,01,23,000/- 145,41,60,713/-\nTotal funds transferred from charitable trust, RECT to\ntrustees (Amount in Rs.)\n145,41,60,713/-\n6.1.1 The assessee trust has furnished a detailed

YASH VARDHAN ARYA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD-1(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K

section 23(4) of the Act that if the house is not self-occupied then it shall be deemed to be the sum for which the property

M/S K.BABU (HUF) ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri. K. Babu (Huf), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.57/2, Dollars Colony, Ward – 7(2)(3), 1St Cross, 2Nd Main, 4Th Phase, Bengaluru. J P Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 078. Pan: Aaggk 0809 G Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. V. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Kannan Narayanan, Jt.Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2020 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan

house”. The provision of section 54F is as follows: “54F. Profit on sale of property used for residence:- (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4

NAGAMMA,RAICHUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE-WARD 1, RAICHUR

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

property and allowed indexed cost of acquisition and deduction under section 54B, but disallowed deduction under section 54F for not depositing sale proceeds in CGAS.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 54F, as the investment was made within the stipulated period for construction of a residential house, and Section 54F(4

MR. ARUNKUMAR NATHAN,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

Section 54 in respect of two residential houses has observed in paras 2 to 4 as under : “ 2. The assessee claimed exemption on capital gains on sale of flat on the ground of acquisition of two houses. The AO set off the capital gain against one of the houses but held the claim not to be admissible against second house

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE vs. RAMCHANDRA NAVEEN, BANGALORE

In the result, we do not find any infirmity in the Order of the learned\nCIT(A)

house. The total amount paid was Rs.11,00,000/- during the\nFY16-17.\nPage No.169 and 170 contain the details of amount paid to Mr. Chetan Gopal for\npurchasing his property. The total amount paid to him was Rs.1,64,00,000/-. However,\nthe property was registered only for Rs.1,15,00,000/-. The remaining amount of\nRs.49

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

4,40,00,000/-\n28,98,05,363/-\n2021-22\n47,29,00,000/- 15,85,90,000/- 63,14,90,000/-\nSub-Total\n115,40,37,713/- 30,01,23,000/- 145,41,60,713/-\nTotal funds transferred from charitable trust, RECT to\n145,41,60,713/-\ntrustees (Amount in Rs.)\n6.1.1 The assessee trust has furnished a detailed