BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

15 results for “section 68”+ Section 50C(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai173Delhi155Jaipur51Hyderabad49Ahmedabad39Indore34Kolkata33Chennai28Nagpur19Raipur18Surat17Bangalore15Pune14Chandigarh11Lucknow11Jodhpur9Rajkot9Guwahati9Visakhapatnam3Karnataka3Patna3Agra3Cuttack1Cochin1Amritsar1Dehradun1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 153C30Section 50C15Addition to Income11Section 69A8Section 1487Natural Justice7Capital Gains6Section 271A5Section 695Section 250

MR. PRAKASH CHAND BETHALA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), BANGALORE

ITA 999/BANG/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 148Section 234Section 50C

2,68,25,802/- on the alleged transfer of property during the year invoking the provisions of sec. 50C of the Act under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3.1 The learned CIT[A] failed to appreciate that there was no transfer of the property during the year under appeal and hence, the computation

SHRI. SOMASHEKAR VENKATASWAMAPPA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

5
Section 143(3)5
Penalty5
ITA 1086/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Bangalore
14 Aug 2019
AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Years : 2014-15 Shri Somashekar Venkataswamappa, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Arehalli Village, Uttarahalli Post, Income Tax, Subramanyapura Post, Circle – 3(2)(1), Bangalore-560 061. Bangalore. Pan : Acvpv 7051 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rajeev C. Nulvi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2019 O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz, A.M. :

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev C. Nulvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 50C

68,00/- on re-computation on long term capital gains (LTCG) on sale of property by invoking of the provisions of section 50C of the Act and thereby raising demand of Rs.15,52,840/-. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 27.12.2016 for Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)-3, Bangalore

SMT SUSHAMA RAJESH RAO ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2012-13 Sushama Rajesh Rao, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner No.159, Priyadarshani, R. T. Nagar, Of Income Tax, Mla Layout, Circle – 6(2)(1), Bangalore – 560 032. Bangalore. Pan : Acypr 5251 J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. V. Chandrashekar, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 234BSection 250Section 49Section 50(2)Section 50C

2. Briefly stated, the fact of the case shows that assessee is an individual who filed her return of income on 30.08.2012 declaring total income of Rs.33,71,480/- comprising of income from capital gains, income from house property and income from other sources. This return was revised on 05.08.2013 at total income of Rs.39,70,830/-. 3. Subsequently

TYCO FIRE AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 270/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Acit, M/S. Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, Rmz Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 0087 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

50C Provision for full value of consideration in certain cases (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred

APURVA SARIN,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 1049/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jan 2024AY 2017-18
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 50C

68,850 as per the valuation report dated 27.07.2020 issued by the\nDistrict valuation officer in respect of the Property No.D-1032 New Friends\nColony, New Delhi.\n6. That both the learned CIT(A) and Assessing Officer failed to appreciate the real\nstate of affairs of the real estate market at the time of transfer, being\ndemonetization and the defaults committed

SMT. HIREHAL RAGHAVENDRA SOUDAMANI,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 933/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Hirehal Raghavendra Soudamini, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.66, ‘Shreema’ 1St Main, 5Th Cross, Ward –6[3][2], Rmv 2Nd Stage, 1St Block Aswath Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 025. Pan : Apkps 4537 B Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore Date Of Hearing : 15.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 48Section 50Section 50CSection 50C(2)

section 50C(2) of the Act. The AO made reference to the DVO but since the report had not been received by that time, the assessment was completed. The AO could not take cognizance of the same. 5. In the appellate proceedings before the First Appellate Authority i.e., CIT(A), the report of the DVO was available

SRI. D. K SHIVAKUMAR ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

ITA 1064/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan Kassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: S/ShriFor Respondent: Shri.Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 292CSection 69ASection 69B

Section 69A of the Act.The addition is made out on basis of loose sheets of documents, which does not come under the ambit of ‘books of entry’ or as ‘evidence’ under the Indian Evidence Act. Reliance is placed on following decisions: 57  CBI Vs. V.C. Shukla (1998) 3 SCC 410  Common Cause and others Vs. Union of India

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1061/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

2. Brown folder marked as Annexure : A/CCDGLT8/1 Annexure A/CCDGLT8/1 Page No. 108, 109, 129, containing loose sheets serially 131 numbered from 1 to 134 found and seized from the office of M/s. Coffee Day Global Ltd. At No.23/2, Coffee Day Square, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore 6.2 Considering the above documents for recording satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, he recorded

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1062/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

2. Brown folder marked as Annexure : A/CCDGLT8/1 Annexure A/CCDGLT8/1 Page No. 108, 109, 129, containing loose sheets serially 131 numbered from 1 to 134 found and seized from the office of M/s. Coffee Day Global Ltd. At No.23/2, Coffee Day Square, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore 6.2 Considering the above documents for recording satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, he recorded

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1064/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

2. Brown folder marked as Annexure : A/CCDGLT8/1 Annexure A/CCDGLT8/1 Page No. 108, 109, 129, containing loose sheets serially 131 numbered from 1 to 134 found and seized from the office of M/s. Coffee Day Global Ltd. At No.23/2, Coffee Day Square, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore 6.2 Considering the above documents for recording satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, he recorded

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1065/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

2. Brown folder marked as Annexure : A/CCDGLT8/1 Annexure A/CCDGLT8/1 Page No. 108, 109, 129, containing loose sheets serially 131 numbered from 1 to 134 found and seized from the office of M/s. Coffee Day Global Ltd. At No.23/2, Coffee Day Square, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore 6.2 Considering the above documents for recording satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, he recorded

VENUGOPAL NAIDU PUSHPARAJ ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 880/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri H. Guruswamy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

68,85,955/- 4. Capital Gains on sale of 7 Flats obtained from M/s. S.V Developers - Rs. 58,29,375/- The Assessee and his Co-owner Sri. N. Prakash had owned a land bearing Survey No. 115/2, B Narayanapura Village, K.R Puram, Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk measuring 10890 sq.ft. The Assessee and his co-owner have entered into

SRI PRAKASH BHAJANDAS TALREJA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are\npartly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1066/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 234BSection 271ASection 69

2\nThe person referred to in S.No.4 (Shri. Prakash\nTalreja) who is the Chairman of Coffee Day Group.\n7.\nSatisfaction of the Assessing Officer of the\nperson referred to in section 153A and I am satisfied\nthat the documents/information contained\nin this section 153A and I am satisfied\nthat the documents/information contained\npertains or/and relates

DR.SYED RAHMATULLAH AZIZULLAH ,GULBARGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 , KALABURAGI

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

ITA 241/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Palani Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 234ASection 50CSection 50C(1)

50C(1) withoutcompiling with all the legal formalities is also bad in law and therefore the adoption of suchdeemed consideration is to be deleted. 6. In any case and without prejudice the assessing officer has erred in holding and adoptingthe cost as NIL and the CIT(A) have erred in confirming the same. Even as per law, thecost

DR.SYED RAHMATULLAH AZIZULLAH ,GULBARGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 , KALABURAGI

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

ITA 240/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Palani Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 148Section 234ASection 50CSection 50C(1)

50C(1) withoutcompiling with all the legal formalities is also bad in law and therefore the adoption of suchdeemed consideration is to be deleted. 6. In any case and without prejudice the assessing officer has erred in holding and adoptingthe cost as NIL and the CIT(A) have erred in confirming the same. Even as per law, thecost