M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 131 of the act on 3/2/2018 and 6/2/2080. He further relied upon the decision of the Honourable Karnataka High Court in case of DCIT versus Sunil Kumar Sharma 469 ITR 197 (Karnataka) [TS-5158-HC- ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 31 of 48 2024(Karnataka)-O] and decision of the coordinate bench in case of ITO versus

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 131 of the act on 3/2/2018 and 6/2/2080. He further relied upon the decision of the Honourable Karnataka High Court in case of DCIT versus Sunil Kumar Sharma 469 ITR 197 (Karnataka) [TS-5158-HC- ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 31 of 48 2024(Karnataka)-O] and decision of the coordinate bench in case of ITO versus

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 131 of the act on 3/2/2018 and 6/2/2080. He further relied upon the decision of the Honourable Karnataka High Court in case of DCIT versus Sunil Kumar Sharma 469 ITR 197 (Karnataka) [TS-5158-HC- ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 31 of 48 2024(Karnataka)-O] and decision of the coordinate bench in case of ITO versus

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

9a) of\nthe paper book and also extracted by the ld AO in his assessment order\nat last but one page no. Looking at page it is apparent that there is no\nreference of Divyashree building on the paper. Thus, how the ld AO\nhas linked this paper is statement of the assessee which did not say that

M/S. GLOBAL TECH PARK PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

9a) of\nthe paper book and also extracted by the ld AO in his assessment order\nat last but one page no. Looking at page it is apparent that there is no\nreference of Divyashree building on the paper. Thus, how the ld AO\nhas linked this paper is statement of the assessee which did not say that

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 1, BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. GLOBAL TECH PARK PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed

9a) of\nthe paper book and also extracted by the ld AO in his assessment order\nat last but one page no. Looking at page it is apparent that there is no\nreference of Divyashree building on the paper. Thus, how the ld AO\nhas linked this paper is statement of the assessee which did not say that

M/S. VBHC VALUE HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 7(1)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

section 14A should be restricted to Rs.25,68,400/- being exempt income. In course of arguments, it was submitted by the learned AR of the assessee that it is a mistake. But in view of this that the Computation of Income is not filed before us and the assessee has earned in the present year Rs.58

M/S. VBHC VALUE HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD- 7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

section 14A should be restricted to Rs.25,68,400/- being exempt income. In course of arguments, it was submitted by the learned AR of the assessee that it is a mistake. But in view of this that the Computation of Income is not filed before us and the assessee has earned in the present year Rs.58

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012-13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no transaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012- 13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.” Similar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16. 3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

9A: Without prejudice to the above, there was no\ntransaction with the said contractors during the Previous Year 2012-\n13 and hence no addition was called for in this AY and thus the\naddition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.”\nSimilar additional ground in assessment year 2015-16.\n3.1 With regard to above additional ground, the contention

CHITRADURGA ZILLA REDDY JANA SANGH(R),CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 EXEMPTION, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

section 11(1)” but did not exercised his option by e- filing Form-9A before due date as per Rule-17 of the Income Tax Rules. Chitradurga Zilla Reddy Jana Sangha (R), Chitradurga Page 4 of 13 4.1 The AR of the assessee by way of written submission stated that the assessee trust filed its return of income disclosing

M/S NDS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15

9A & 9B, Pritech Park, Circle-1(2), Bengaluru. Survey No.51-64/4, Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur Village, Bengaluru-560 103. PAN –AABCN 2524 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 09.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, Accountant Member This appeal