Mindtree Ltd. v. ACIT

427 ITR 338High Court2020#24956 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2022.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Mindtree Ltd. v. ACIT

M/S. Mindtree Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 10ASection 115J

…iness liability and overseas travel and not attributable to delivery of computer software outside India. The ld AR also submitted that the principle laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case for AY 2008-09 in Mindtree Ltd vs ACT (2020) 427 ITR 338 (Kar) with regard to exclusion of telecommunication charges should be made applicable to insurance charges also as according to the definition of ‘export turnover’, freight, telecommunication charges or insurance are to be Page 5 of 19 excluded provided it is attributable to the delivery of the articles or things outside India. Hence the decisio…

Eit Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Hewlett Packard Global Soft Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 1455/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: PendingITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT (DR)

Section 10ASection 80H

…274 (Karnataka)  CIT v Mphasis Ltd [2020] 113 taxmann.com 74 (SC)  CIT v Kshema Technologies Ltd [2016] 66 taxmann.com 165 (Karnataka)  TATA Elxsi Ltd v ACIT ITA No. 142 of 2008 decision dated 20.10.2014 — Karnataka High Court  Mindtree Ltd v ACIT [2020] 427 ITR 338 (Kar)  CIT v Aztec Software Technology Ltd ITA No. 348 of 2013 dated 16.9.2020 Karnataka High Court  CIT v Zylog Systems Ltd [2020] 121 taxmann.com 280 (Madras)  Zylog Systems Ltd v ITO [2011] 128 ITD 105 (Chennai SB) Ground No. 9 raised by assessee is as under: Ground No. 9 of the assessee before the ITAT was as under: "9. The Honourable DRP…

M/S Centum Electronics Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2194/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramsubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayan, D.R

Section 10BSection 40

…t this issue may be restored to the file of the AO, even though it was not adjudicated by Ld CIT(A). He further submitted that the claim of the assessee is supported by the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, which are reported in 382 ITR 654; 427 ITR 338 and 428 ITR 245. 7. With regard to grounds 3 to 4.3, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has raised certain addition claims before the AO by furnishing a letter dated 01-12-2010. He submitted that a copy of the above said letter is placed at pages12-13 of the paper book. He submitted that the additional claims put forth by the assessee before…