“book profits”

M/S. Hemavathy Power & Light Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Ms. Padmavathy S

held as follow:- “3.5 The appellant has raised ground No.4 relating to the addition of Rs.79,87,590/- being depreciation on goodwill to the book profits computed u/s 115JB of the Act. The AO made this addition on the ground that he is empowered to make adjustment in the book ... Therefore, the appellant succeeds in respect of ground No.4 and the AO is directed to delete this addition made in the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act.” 9. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(Appeals), the revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal

M/S Hemavathy Power & Light Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Ms. Padmavathy S

held as follow:- “3.5 The appellant has raised ground No.4 relating to the addition of Rs.79,87,590/- being depreciation on goodwill to the book profits computed u/s 115JB of the Act. The AO made this addition on the ground that he is empowered to make adjustment in the book ... Therefore, the appellant succeeds in respect of ground No.4 and the AO is directed to delete this addition made in the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act.” 9. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(Appeals), the revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal

M/S Hemavathy Power & Light Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Ms. Padmavathy S

held as follow:- “3.5 The appellant has raised ground No.4 relating to the addition of Rs.79,87,590/- being depreciation on goodwill to the book profits computed u/s 115JB of the Act. The AO made this addition on the ground that he is empowered to make adjustment in the book ... Therefore, the appellant succeeds in respect of ground No.4 and the AO is directed to delete this addition made in the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act.” 9. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(Appeals), the revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal

M/S Hemavathy Power & Light Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-11(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Ms. Padmavathy S

held as follow:- “3.5 The appellant has raised ground No.4 relating to the addition of Rs.79,87,590/- being depreciation on goodwill to the book profits computed u/s 115JB of the Act. The AO made this addition on the ground that he is empowered to make adjustment in the book ... Therefore, the appellant succeeds in respect of ground No.4 and the AO is directed to delete this addition made in the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act.” 9. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(Appeals), the revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal

M/S Axa Group Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

assessee company filed the return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 28.11.2012 declaring an income of Rs.13,58,14,480 showing book profits of Rs.13,33,35,659. Through Page 3 of 17 CASS the case was selected for scrutiny. The assessing officer (AO) referred the case

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

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

computing a total income of Rs 56,700,030 under the normal provisions of the Act and a book profit of Rs 1,065,483,802 under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee claimed a refund of Rs 398,538,500 in the income tax return. Assessment proceedings were ... order dated 31.12.2015 u/s. 143(3) of the Act in which the taxable income was assessed at Rs 1,057,839,903/- and the book profits at Rs 1,065,483,801/-. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee and against the same, both

M/S. Bangalore International Airport Limited, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Bangalore

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

computing a total income of Rs 56,700,030 under the normal provisions of the Act and a book profit of Rs 1,065,483,802 under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee claimed a refund of Rs 398,538,500 in the income tax return. Assessment proceedings were ... order dated 31.12.2015 u/s. 143(3) of the Act in which the taxable income was assessed at Rs 1,057,839,903/- and the book profits at Rs 1,065,483,801/-. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee and against the same, both

M/S Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(1)(1), Bangalore

Bench: Shri. George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S

Ground Nos.37 to 42 - Disallowance of provision for warranty. (vi) Grounds 43 to 45 - Addition of provision for warranty to book profits. (vii) Ground Nos.46 to 50 - Disallowance of advertisement and business promotion expenditure. (viii) Other ground regarding initiation of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. TP adjustment relating ... No.35/Bang/2019 Page 19 of 21 25. Ground Nos. (43) to (45) on the issue of addition of provision for warranty to the book profits under section 115JB is incidental. In view of the decision on the allowability of provision for warranty, this ground which is incidental, does not warrant

M/S.Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

consequently the impugned assessment order founded thereon deserves to be cancelled. 3. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the assessment of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, at Rs. 120,97,36,141/- under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case ... learned CIT[A] ought to have appreciated that the appellant had erroneously returned a book profit of Rs. 119,98,62,241/- in the return filed in response to the notice u/s. 153A of the Act and there cannot be an assessment merely on account of the consent

M/S.Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

consequently the impugned assessment order founded thereon deserves to be cancelled. 3. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the assessment of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, at Rs. 120,97,36,141/- under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case ... learned CIT[A] ought to have appreciated that the appellant had erroneously returned a book profit of Rs. 119,98,62,241/- in the return filed in response to the notice u/s. 153A of the Act and there cannot be an assessment merely on account of the consent

M/S.Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

consequently the impugned assessment order founded thereon deserves to be cancelled. 3. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the assessment of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, at Rs. 120,97,36,141/- under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case ... learned CIT[A] ought to have appreciated that the appellant had erroneously returned a book profit of Rs. 119,98,62,241/- in the return filed in response to the notice u/s. 153A of the Act and there cannot be an assessment merely on account of the consent

M/S. Biocon Limited, Bengaluru vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the legal issue raised in ground no

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint M/S. Biocon Ltd., Commissioner Of 20Th Km, Hosur Road, Income-Tax, Electronic City, Large Tax Payers Bangalore – 560 100. Unit [Ltu], Pan: Aaacb7461R Vs. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For A.Y. 2010-11 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein Below Are Independent & Without Prejudice To The Other Grounds Preferred By The Appellant. 1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The ' Case & In Law, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals ["Cit(A)"] Dated March 28, 2018 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") For Ay 2010-11 To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Facts & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Scope Of Re-Assessment Proceedings

realize the sales consideration on transfer of "development and commercialization rights" of Oral Insulin. 5. Addition of unrealised foreign exchange loss in computation of book profits under section 115JB of the Act 5.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in holding unrealised ... foreign exchange loss to be an unascertained and contingent liability and adding the same in computing the book profits under section 115JB of the Act. Page 5 of 41 5.2 That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the computation

Mapei Construction Products (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 283/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Mapei Construction Products (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant A01 & B01, Solus Jain Commissioner Of Heights, Income Tax, 1St Floor, 1St Cross, Circle 4 (1)(2), J C Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 002. Pan: Aahcm0464A Appellant Respondent : Shri S. Ramasubramanyam, Assessee By Ca : Shri Janardhan, Addl. Cit Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Final Assessment Order Dated 24/03/2021 Passed By The Ld.Acit, Under National Assessment Centre, New Delhi, Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 143(3A) & (3B) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year 2016- 17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Jurisdiction 1.1. That The Learned Lower Authorities Erred In Law & On Facts In Referring The Case To The Learned Transfer Pricing

return of income. 4. ADDITION OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS TO INCOME COMPUTED UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND BOOK PROFITS COMPUTED U/S. 115JB OF THE ACT — RS.36,20,870/- 4.1. That the learned lower authorities erred in law and on facts in adding provision ... learned lower authorities erred in law and on facts in adding provision for bad and doubtful debts of Rs.36,20,870/- to the book profits computed u/s. 115JB of the Act. 5. INTEREST EXPENDITURE CLAIMED U/S. 57(iii) OF THE ACT 5.1. That the learned lower authorities erred

United Breweries Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

learned AO has erred in law and on facts in concluding that INR 70,66,372 should be added back to the book profits for the purpose of 115JB of the Act. 38. The brief facts on this issue are that during the year under consideration, the assessee disclosed