SMT. DR. SUDHA KRISHNASWAMY vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax - 3 - – respondent No.1 herein. It was contended that the assessee sold one vacant site at Tumkur on 06.02.2012 for consideration of Rs.52,06,000/- which resulted in a net capital gain

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SMT. B. SUMANGALADEVI,

Appeal is allowed

Bench: K.BHAKTHAVATSALA,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

capital gains and it has to be assessed in her hands, but directed the Assessing Officer to give credit of `10,00,000/- seized in the hands of B.B.Swamy to the assessee as against her tax liability. Hence, the Assessing Officer filed an application before the C.I.T (Appeals) seeking withdrawal of the direction in so far as giving credit

M/S. THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

delay of one day in filing the return ought to have been condoned and no powers under Section 154 of the Act would have been invoked. Referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.S. Balaram, - 7 - ITO vs. Volkart Brothers reported in (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC) which has been quoted

COMMISSIONER OF vs. MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

capital assets when it amounts to double deduction as the income of the assessee is already exempt and amended provisions of the Act also denies such claim for depreciation by Trust? 4. Whether the Tribunal is directing the CIT to condone delay in filing Form No.10 and consider the claim of assessee with regard to claim under section

S B JAGADEESH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

P. D. PONNAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

RAJAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

RAMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

SRI SANTOSH A SHETTY vs. THE STATE OF KARANTAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

SMT. V.KRISHNAMMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

MR C V MANJUNATHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

BORALINGAIAH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

SRI S BAGHIRATHA vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

R NAGARATHNA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

B YUVARAJ vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

SRI B S PATIL vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

MR JAI KISHAN VIRWANI vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which

SRI SANJAY JAYARAM vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520) '….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which