HANCHIPURA CHANNAIAH NANDAKISHORE,MAHALKSHMIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD INTL, TAXATION 1(2) BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.258/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Hanchipura Channaiah Nandakishore 87, 2Nd Stage & Phase Mahalakshmipuram 2Nd Stage, 14Th Main, West Of Chord Ito Road Vs. Ward International Taxation 1(2) Mahalakshmipuram Bangalore Bangalore 560 086 Pan No :Blrpn0428A Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.R. Respondent By : Dr. Divya K.J., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2025

54B or section 54D or section 54EC or section 54F or section 54G or section 54GA or section 54GB were inserted by the Finance Act, 2019 which is effective from 01.04.2020, but the impugned case on hand is related to the AY 2018-19 & therefore the exemption u/s 54/54F can be claimed even without filling a return of income. Lastly

SRI ALAGAPPA MUTHIAH(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

54B,\n54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H shall be\nchargeable to income tax under the head capital gains\nand by legal fiction it is deemed to be the income of the\nprevious year in which the transfer took place. The\nmode of computation as prescribed under Section 48\nwould indicate that the income chargeable under the\nhead capital

SRI ALAGAPPA ANNAMALAI(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

54B,\n54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H shall be\nchargeable to income tax under the head capital gains\nand by legal fiction it is deemed to be the income of the\nprevious year in which the transfer took place. The\nmode of computation as prescribed under Section 48\nwould indicate that the income chargeable under the\nhead capital

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU vs. ALAGAPPA ANNAMALAI (HUF), BENGALURU

The appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

54B,\nITA Nos.775 & 954/Bang/2024\nSri Alagappa Muthiah (HUF), Bangalore\nITA Nos.776 & 955/Bang/2024\nSri Alagappa Annamalai (HUF), Bangalore\nPage 17 of 34\n54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H shall be\nchargeable to income tax under the head capital gains\nand by legal fiction it is deemed to be the income of the\nprevious year in which the transfer took

SRI. C. RAMAIAH REDDYT vs. DCIT,

In the result, ITA No.1778/Bang/2012 (A

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

54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H, be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. (1A) …….. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the profits or gains arising from the transfer by way of conversion

SRI. C. RAMAIAH REDDYT vs. DCIT,

In the result, ITA No.1778/Bang/2012 (A

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

54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H, be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. (1A) …….. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the profits or gains arising from the transfer by way of conversion

SHIVAKUMAR KHENY (HUF) ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2015-16

54B of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. The learned counsel for Assessee drew our attention to the provisions of Sec.54 of the Act which we have extracted in the earlier part of this order and submitted that to claim deduction u/s.54

DR. DEVIKA GUNASHEELA,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year: 2012-13

54B,54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 5 Dr. Devika Gunasheela, Bengaluru Page 4 of 19 4H, be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. Under Section 48 of the Act, income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" shall

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

transfer made to the assessee’s capital account in the books maintained for the nursery called Orchids. The assessee’s explanation is that this debit is nothing but entry made to ITA No.1405 to 1408/Bang/2013 Page 9 of 25 reconcile the difference of Orchids as there was difference in the opening balance. We agree with the view taken

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

transfer made to the assessee’s capital account in the books maintained for the nursery called Orchids. The assessee’s explanation is that this debit is nothing but entry made to ITA No.1405 to 1408/Bang/2013 Page 9 of 25 reconcile the difference of Orchids as there was difference in the opening balance. We agree with the view taken

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

transfer made to the assessee’s capital account in the books maintained for the nursery called Orchids. The assessee’s explanation is that this debit is nothing but entry made to ITA No.1405 to 1408/Bang/2013 Page 9 of 25 reconcile the difference of Orchids as there was difference in the opening balance. We agree with the view taken

K.R. PARAMAHAMSA,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

transfer made to the assessee’s capital account in the books maintained for the nursery called Orchids. The assessee’s explanation is that this debit is nothing but entry made to ITA No.1405 to 1408/Bang/2013 Page 9 of 25 reconcile the difference of Orchids as there was difference in the opening balance. We agree with the view taken

SRI K R UDAYA KUMAR,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

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

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

price paid is not decisive to say whether the land is agricultural or not. 9.13. We may refer to a judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. E. Udayakumar [2006] 284 ITR 511 where the Madras High Court has referred to the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case Page

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

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

transfer of capital :- 13 -: ITA Nos.215, 303, 304, 305 & 306/Bang/2020 asset or the transaction relating to sale of land was not an adventure in the nature of trade so as to tax the income arising out of this transaction as business income 4. Principal CIT Vs Heenaben Bhadresh Mehta R/Tax Appeal No. 672 of 2018 AY 2019-10 order

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

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

transfer of capital :- 13 -: ITA Nos.215, 303, 304, 305 & 306/Bang/2020 asset or the transaction relating to sale of land was not an adventure in the nature of trade so as to tax the income arising out of this transaction as business income 4. Principal CIT Vs Heenaben Bhadresh Mehta R/Tax Appeal No. 672 of 2018 AY 2019-10 order

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

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

transfer of capital :- 13 -: ITA Nos.215, 303, 304, 305 & 306/Bang/2020 asset or the transaction relating to sale of land was not an adventure in the nature of trade so as to tax the income arising out of this transaction as business income 4. Principal CIT Vs Heenaben Bhadresh Mehta R/Tax Appeal No. 672 of 2018 AY 2019-10 order

G N VENUGOPAL,DEVANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee for all these assessment years are partly allowed

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

transfer of capital :- 13 -: ITA Nos.215, 303, 304, 305 & 306/Bang/2020 asset or the transaction relating to sale of land was not an adventure in the nature of trade so as to tax the income arising out of this transaction as business income 4. Principal CIT Vs Heenaben Bhadresh Mehta R/Tax Appeal No. 672 of 2018 AY 2019-10 order