ARUN K THIAGARAJAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order passed by the assessing officer and

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to Assessment year 2003-04. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 29.06.2011 on the following substantial question of law: (i) Whether the order passed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.1170/BANG/2008 DATED 30.01.2009 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (INTL., TAXN.,) CIRCLE-II(1), BANGALORE AND ETC., 3 THIS APPEAL

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

property, in pursuance of an illegal or immoral contract, to recover it back; for 'the Courts will not assist an illegal transaction in any respect'. The maxim is therefore, intimately connected with the more comprehensive rule of law, ex turpi causa non oritur actio, on account of which no Court will allow itself to be made the instrument of enforcing

MR.M.GEORGE JOSEPH vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMET TAX OFFICER

In the result, order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court on the following substantial question of law: "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SMT HEMA KRISHNAMURTHY

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 25.10.2017 on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts

M/S MYPOL POLYMERS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 25.10.2017 on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts

SMT Y MANJULA REDDY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated:02.12.2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was admitted by a bench

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. HOSAGRAHAR

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED I.T.A. NO.601 OF 2019 2 22.04.2019 PASSED IN ITA NO.1544/BANG/2017, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW SATED ABOVE AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1544/BANG/2017 DATED

M/S SOBHA INTERIORS (P) LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ['Act' for short] assailing the common order dated 23.11.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Bangalore ['Tribunal' for short] in ITA Nos.1607 and 1692/Bang/2012 relating to the assessment years 2007-08 and 2009-10 by the assessee M/s. Sobha Interiors [P] Ltd., and ITA No.1630/Bang/2012 relating to the assessment year

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) vs. M/S KARAVALI HOUSING

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 PASSED IN ITA No.1804/BANG/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, S.SUJATHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

COMMISSIONER OF vs. MR VINAY MISHRA

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2013 on the following substantial question of law: (i) Whether on the facts

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRESTIGE ESTATE PROJECTS PVT LTD

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

260A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT BANGALORE IN ITA NO.218/BANG/2009, DATED:11.09.2009 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONER AND CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

M/S. RAO COMPUTER CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 13.04.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was admitted

M/S. RAO COMPUTER CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assesse against the order dated 24.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2009-10. The appeal was admitted

M/S. RAO COMPUTERS CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (OSD)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 13.04.2017. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court on the following substantial questions of law: " (1) Whether

M/S. RAO COMPUTERS CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assesse against the order dated 24.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2010-11. The appeal was admitted

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SMT.KAMAKSHI DEVI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

property of Rs.20,632/- notice under Section 148 dated 22.03.2010 was issued to the assessee and subsequently a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 28.10.2010 was served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 24.12.2010 allowed the bid to the extent which was debited in the profit and loss account and refused to allow

H N SUBBA RAMA GUPTA (HUF) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

house properties, made an addition of Rs.71,169/- as unexplained cash deposit found in the bank account maintained in the joint names of the members of the assessee-HUF. The same was, therefore, brought to tax. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) unsuccessfully. On further appeal before the Tribunal, the same grounds now urged