022 ITR (Trib) 0259 (followed) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ray

23 ITR (Trib) 447Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#5005 most cited
23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing 022 ITR (Trib) 0259 (followed) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ray

M/S Teekays Interior Solutions Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 400/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.V.Pradeepkumar, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 40

…ot d o n e a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y b e c o m e t a x a b l e o n a c c o u n t o f a retrospective legislation. It has also referred to the decisions of the Delhi & Mumbai Tribunal in SMS Demag Pvt Ltd , 132 ITJ 498 & Sonic Biochem Extractions Pvt. Ltd. 23 ITR (Trib) 447, respectively. We uphold the decision of the CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue.” Thus it is clear that the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal while deciding this issue has taken note of various decisions in favour of the assessee on the point that the payment for purchase of software does not fall in the definition of ro…

Allegris Services India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1370/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (D.R)

…hen TDS was not d o n e an d s ub s eq u en tl y b ec om e ta xa bl e on a cc ou n t o f a retrospective legislation. It has also referred to the decisions of the Delhi & Mumbai Tribunal in SMS Demag Pvt Ltd , 132 ITJ 498 & Sonic Biochem Extractions Pvt. Ltd. 23 ITR (Trib) 447, respectively. We uphold the decision of the CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue.” Thus it is clear that the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal while deciding this issue has taken note of various decisions in favour of the assessee on the point that the payment for purchase of software does not fall in the definition of ro…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Aurigene Discovery Technologies Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1479/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri. L. Bharath, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar Verma, CIT - DR
Section 194JSection 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…ITA.1479/ Bang/2013 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'A', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.1479/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant v. M/s. Aurigene Discovery Technologies Ltd, No.39-40, KIDB Industrial Area, Electronic City Phase –II, Hosur Road, Bengaluru .. Respondent PAN : AADCA2387A Assessee by : Shri. L. Bharath, CA Revenue by : Shri. Sanjay Kumar Verma, CIT - DR Heard on : 29.09.2016 Pronounced on : 23.11.2016 O R D E R P…