DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, all these 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust, filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 along with Form 10B showing that it is registered u/s. 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] declaring its total income at Nil. The above return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order was passed u/s

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013- 14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment years under consideration. 8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is not a matter

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

charitable or religious purposes in India during the Asst. year 2017-18 as Rs. 67,70,38,920/- [ Rs.55,56,54,057/- (revenue expenditure) + Rs. 8,11,20,826/- (capital expenditure)] which amounts to claim of double deduction & the same is accepted by the assessee on the I. Tax web portal. It is worthwhile here to note that once

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013-\n14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the\nimpugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant\n assessment years under consideration.\n8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion\nthat the delay in filing the appeal

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys. 2013-\n14 & 2015-16 to 2018-19 which has been reproduced in the\nimpugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant\n assessment years under consideration.\n8. Based on these submissions, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion\nthat the delay in filing the appeal