SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

section as a whole and accordingly the said insertion of first proviso to s. 12A(2) of the Act w.e.f. 1st Oct., 2014 should be read as retrospective in operation w.e.f. the date when the condition of eligibility for exemption under ss. 11 85 12 as mentioned in s. 12A provided for registration under s. 12AA ae a pre-condition

M/S. SRINIVAS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,MANGALROE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

11) TMI 1081 - ITAT Delhi, the Tribunal held as under:- “The opportunity of cross-examining, Sh. Nitin Aggarwal, a partner of Shree Laxmi Industrial Corporation has also been denied to the assessee on wrong basis by the authorities below that an opportunity of cross examines needs to be given only when third party is involved or a party not known

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed\nas infructuous

reassessment.\n62.1 At the outset, we note that the issue raised by the assessee on\nmerit of the case has been decided in its favour. Accordingly, we do not\nfind any reason to adjudicate the impugned issue on hand. As such, we\nkeep the issue open. Both the Id. AR and the DR did not raise any\nobjection

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

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

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

11 shall inter-alia file its return of income within the due dates. Further it is specifically mentioned that the amendment will take effect from 01/04/2018 and will accordingly apply from assessment Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust, Bangalore Page 19 of 25 year 2018-19 and subsequent years. Hence the Bench is of the view that on the application of general

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

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

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

M/S. SRI. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES(REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

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

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD), KOLAR

11 of the Act.\n47.\nThe aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,KOLAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

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

11 of the Act.\n47. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A) and contended that there was no incriminating material found in\nrelation to the year under consideration. Therefore, the proceedings\nunder section 153A of the Act cannot be initiated for the year under\nconsideration and assessment made in the absence of incriminating\nmaterial being unearthed

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

reassessment has made an addition of Rs. 9,87,652/ - as 23 ITA Nos.1761-1766/Bang/2018 M/s.Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust. income since the Trust is not registered under section 12A of the Act, therefore the benefit available under section 11

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

section 143 or total income assessed, reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order. (11)No addition or disallowance of an amount

SRI MARKANDEYA MAHARSHI PADMASHALI GURUPEETA MAHA SAMSTHANA ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD-3, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

11 benefits, the Assessing Officer could assess only net income of the assessee and not gross receipts. As far as the assessee was concerned, construction of houses, reclamation of land, etc., were part of its regular activities. Houses were built on the land of poor agriculturists. The assessee-society had no legal title or right over the land or houses