MAHESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

revise the orders made without the inquiry to the\nextent he thinks fit. One should not be oblivious of the fact that the\nfiscal statute are to be read literally and no equity or logic has to be\nfound in these. Therefore, if the parliament in its wisdom has given\npower to the decide the extent of enquiry

M/S. ORIGAMI CELLULO PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

revise each and every assessment order. The applicability of the clause is thus essentially contextual. It has to be the opinion of a prudent person properly instructed in law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India reported in 1978 AIR (SC) 597 has laid down the law that a public authority should discharge his duties

T.D.RAJAN vs. ITO,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao & 1. Shri T D Satyan (Huf), Tds Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. Pan:Aabht 8587 J 2. Shri T D Rajan (Huf) Tds Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. Pan:Aabht 8586 K … Appellant Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmagalur. … Respondent

TDS Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. PAN:AABHT 8586 K … Appellant Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmagalur. … Respondent Assessees by: Shri Rajaram Kote, CA. Revenue by: Shri M.Vijay Kumar, ACIT(DR). Date of hearing : 23/11/2015 Date of pronouncement: 29/12/2015. O R D E R Per VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: These two appeals by the two connected assessees are directed against

T.D.SATYAN vs. ITO,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao & 1. Shri T D Satyan (Huf), Tds Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. Pan:Aabht 8587 J 2. Shri T D Rajan (Huf) Tds Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. Pan:Aabht 8586 K … Appellant Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmagalur. … Respondent

TDS Residency, Kadur, Chikmagalur. PAN:AABHT 8586 K … Appellant Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmagalur. … Respondent Assessees by: Shri Rajaram Kote, CA. Revenue by: Shri M.Vijay Kumar, ACIT(DR). Date of hearing : 23/11/2015 Date of pronouncement: 29/12/2015. O R D E R Per VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: These two appeals by the two connected assessees are directed against

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. PR. CIT - 3, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 is allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Harman Connected Services Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Corporation India Private Limited, Income-Tax, [Formerly Known As Symphony Bangalore - 3. Teleca Corporation India Private Limited) No.3 & 3A, Eoiz Industrial Area, Survey No. 85 & 86, Sadarmangla Village, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bangalore – 560 066. Pan : Aabcg 5658 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate : Revenue By Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : .12.2018 O R D E R

TDS was not made on the payment as required u/s 195 of the IT Act.” 3.2 In response to the show cause notice u/s 263 of the Act, the assessee filed its written submissions before the CIT. The CIT, after considering the assessee’s submissions, concluded the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act vide order dated 30.03.2016 setting aside

VASAVI CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Vasavi Credit Co- Operative Society Ltd., No. 108/1, Sri Chakra, The Commissioner Of East Park Road, Income Tax (Tds), Opp. Vasavi Mahal, Bangalore. Malleshwaram, Vs. Bangalore – 560 003. Pan: Aaajv0152C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ramasubramanyam, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-12-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 29/03/2021 Passed By The Ld.Cit (Tds), Bangalore For Ay 2016- 17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Tds) In So Far It Is Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Appellant, Is Bad & Erroneous In Law & Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds) Erred In Law & On Facts In Invoking Provisions Of Section 263 Of The Act With Respect To The Order Passed U/S. 201(1) & 201(1A) On The Ground That They Are Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Revenue.

revising the orders passed u/s 201 ( 1 ) and 201(1A) of the Act even though such orders u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) were subject matter of appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and such appeals were disposed of before the order u/s. 263 was passed. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS

M/S UNITED BREWERIES LTD. vs. .C.I.T.,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. B. R Baskaran

revised to Rs.77,35,19,800/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 21.12.2011 was passed assessing the income at Rs 96,16,99,983/-. Subsequently the CIT, Bangalore -3 initiated proceedings u/s 263 of the Act, on the following issues : i) TDS

SRI. H. NAGARAJA,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

revision u/s 263 of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee also submitted that the issue of donation of Rs.1,50,000/- was examined by the AO and the donations were made by account payee cheque or accounted in the books of account. After referring to same, the AO allowed the same as deduction considering the fact that the donations

M/S MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

u/s 263 of the Act can be invoked only in the case of ‘no enquiry’ made by the AO and not in case where the enquiries were made by the AO but the CIT construes them to be in adequate. The ld counsel for the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSRANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

revision during that period Letter filed by assessee and not for indefinite period dated 29/08/2001 clearly for the amounts of CMB. states that until the previous year relevant to financial year 2001-02, Class I officers were eligible for medical benefit as per Page 25 of 74 ITA No.507 to 566 /Bang/2020 the “Reimbursement of Medical Expenses Scheme