INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 EXEMPTIONS , BANGALORE vs. M/S CENTRE FPR CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR PLATFORMS , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Centre For Cellular & Molecular Platforms, The Income Tax Officer (E), Post Bag No. 6505, Ward -1 , Vs. G.K.V.K. P.O. Bangalore. Bellary Road, Bangalore – 560 065. Pan: Aadcc8572D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ujjwal Kumar, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2019

12A is brought in the statute to confer benefit of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act on the genuine trusts which had not changed its objectives and had carried on the same charitable objects in the past as well as in the current year based on which the registration u/s. 12AA is granted by the DIT (Exemptions)." 7.5 In light

MR. MOHAMMED HANIF MOHAMMED YUSUF DHARWADKAR,HUBLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

12A) of the Act. It is also been proposed by Ld.AR that section 68 of the Act is not applicable

MR. P. NARASIMHA RAO,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, MANGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

68 of the Act. Since there was no books of accounts, there could be no credit in such books. The balance sheet, P&L account prepared by assessee cannot be books of accounts. For this purpose, we can go through the provisions of section 2(12A

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

12A) and hence,\nthose diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books\nfor invoking provisions of sections 68

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

12A)", "127", "148(2)", "2(40)" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147/148 were valid, particularly regarding the grounds of borrowed satisfaction, lack of independent reasons, and whether the addition under Section 68

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,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\nallowed

12A)\nand hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be\nconsidered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

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

12A) and hence, ITA Nos.1656 to 1658/Bang/2024 Page 27 of 32 those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,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\nallowed

12A)\nand hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be\nconsidered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

M/S INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE(IMC) ,BAGALKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , BAGALKOT

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year: 2015-16

12A(2) and therefore an Assessee which obtained registration under section 12AA Page 5 of 9 during pendency of appeal was entitled to exemption claimed under section 11 of the Act. 10. The learned counsel for the Assessee in this regard placed reliance on a decision of the ITAT Cochin Bench in SNDP Yogam v. Assistant Director

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

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

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

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

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

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

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

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

M/S. H & F GAMES PVT. LTD.,BELLANDUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 & AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

M/S. H & F GAMES PVT. LTD.,BELLANDUR, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 & AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

HUNGRY AND FOOLISH INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED ,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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68

N 9 SPORTS & LEISURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

12A) and hence, those diary, note book and retrieved data cannot be considered as books for invoking provisions of sections 68