THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS. VANAJA MATTHEN

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: This Court, Questioning The Order Dated 25.01.2017 In

capital gain is allowable to investment made in residential building and not investment made on land. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing ITA.No.456/2017 - 4 - Officer, the respondent-assessee filed appeal in ITA No.968/R- 8/CIT(A)–V/2011-12 before the Appellate Authority. 3. The Appellate Authority, on appreciation of material on record accepted the contentions of the assessee and observed

SMT. M R PRABHAVATHY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Election Petition No.1 Of 2019 Connected With Election Petition No.2 Of 2019

gainful employment except his influence in political background of his grand father, father, uncle, whereas the respondent No.2 - A.Manju is a qualified law graduate and Ex-Minister and Ex-member of various organization was contested and succeeded against JDS. The BJP had expected the Hassan constituency to be the winning constituency. The respondent No.1 while filing his nomination

THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11(4), RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI: K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD., NO. 150, DIAMOND DISTRICT, TOWER B, PENT HOUSE, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 038. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: K.P. KUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11(4), RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI: K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD., NO. 150, DIAMOND DISTRICT, TOWER B, PENT HOUSE, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 038. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: K.P. KUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11(4), RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI: K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD., NO. 150, DIAMOND DISTRICT, TOWER B, PENT HOUSE, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 038. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: K.P. KUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL

SATISH N vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Raghvendra S. Chauhan

Section 93 of the Act, namely "a canvasser…solicits the customer for such vehicle (public service vehicle) ”. Therefore, an aggregator is covered under Section 93 of the Act. 53. Of course, Mr. Sajan Poovayya, the learned Senior counsel, has argued that an aggregator does not go on to the road to solicit customers. But in the Digital Age, the internet

THE COMMISSIONER vs. M/S VIJAYA BANK

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

150 (Karnataka)’. The aforesaid aspect could not be disputed by learned counsel for the revenue. For the reasons assigned in the aforesaid decision, the third substantial question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 8 7. With respect to the fifth substantial question of law, it was pointed out that the aforesaid question

M/S. KARNATAKA INSTRADE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 41(1) of the Act, 15 the Tribunal ought to have taken the deeming fiction to its logical end and allowed the expenditure against such income. Further, the order made by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 2000-01 was set aside by the First Appellate Authority and the said order was confirmed by the Tribunal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M.R.PADMAVATHY TRUST

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.PRABHAVATHY

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SHRI. M.R. SEETHARAM

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.ANANDARAM

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.PATTABHIRAM

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.KODANDARAM

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (4) vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas

DR PRESTEENA MATHEW vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

150. DR. DEEPTHI APANNA D/O. H N APPANNA, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 531, 3RD MAIN, SUBRAMANAYPURA POST, AGS LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560061 151. DR. ANIL KUMAR S/O. GIRIDHAR KAMBLE, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT HOUSE NO. 8-79, NEAR JEEVVESHWAR SCHOOL, SHAHAPUR,DIST - YADGIR, KARNATAKA 585223 41 152. DR. R PRABHU VIKASH S/O. RAVICHANDRAN, AGED 27 YEARS 447, MANIAM VELAPPAN STREET

DR ARJUN KALASAPUR vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

150. DR. DEEPTHI APANNA D/O. H N APPANNA, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 531, 3RD MAIN, SUBRAMANAYPURA POST, AGS LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560061 151. DR. ANIL KUMAR S/O. GIRIDHAR KAMBLE, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT HOUSE NO. 8-79, NEAR JEEVVESHWAR SCHOOL, SHAHAPUR,DIST - YADGIR, KARNATAKA 585223 41 152. DR. R PRABHU VIKASH S/O. RAVICHANDRAN, AGED 27 YEARS 447, MANIAM VELAPPAN STREET