KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu\Nand\Nshri Keshav Dubey\N\Nita Nos.512 & 513/Bang/2025\N Assessment Year : 2021-22 & 2015-16\N\Nkarnataka Housing Board\N4Th Floor Cauvery Bhavan\Nk.G. Road\Nbangalore 560 009\Nvs.\Ndcit (Exemptions)\Ncircle-1\Nbangalore\N\Npan No:Aaajk0398K\N\Nappellant Respondent\N\Nappellant By : Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.R.\Nrespondent By : Sri K.M. Mahesh, D.R.\N\Ndate Of Hearing : 17.09.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2025\N\Norder\N\Nper Keshav Dubey:\N\Nthese Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The 1D. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 18.02.2025 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1073418441(1) For The Assessment Year 2021-22 & Vide Order Dated 31.1.2025 With Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1072790068(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issues In Both The Appeals Are Similar, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.\N\N2. First, We Take Up Assessee'S Appeal In Ita No.512/Bang/2025 For The Assessment Year 2021-22 For Adjudication. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:\N\N1. General Ground\N\N1.

TDS amounting to Rs.1,76,112 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.\n\n15. 2. The learned Assessing officer has failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are applicable in computing the income under section 11 to 13

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE TURF CLUB LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

TDS u/s 194B of the Act.” We note that Mumbai Tribunal considered the issues in accordance with various provisions independently as per the directions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court 13 and held that section

BANGALORE TURF CLUB LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

TDS u/s 194B of the Act.” We note that Mumbai Tribunal considered the issues in accordance with various provisions independently as per the directions of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court 13 and held that section

M/S. CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS filed by the respective appellant-petitioners were processed in purported exercise of the power under section 200A, the amount of fee under section 234E is computed and determined. The demand is made and the intimation given under section 200A includes the computation and the determination of the fee payable by the appellantpetitioners.[Para 13

DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals filed by assessee and revenue for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. 13

DELL INDIA P LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), LTU, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals filed by assessee and revenue for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. 13

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE vs. M/S.DELL INDIA PVT.LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals filed by assessee and revenue for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. 13

DCIT vs. SASKEN NETWORK ENGG. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Sasken Network Engineering Limited, Of Income Tax, No.139/25, Amarjyothi Layout, Circle - 12(3), 14/3, 4Th Floor, Rastrothana Ring Road, Domlur, Bhavan (Opp. Rbi), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560071. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaics 4405 Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Smt. R. Premi, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Respondent By : Shri. C. Narayan, Ca Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.01.2013 Of Cit(Appeals)-Iii, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Facts & Circumstances Under Which The Said Appeal By The Revenue Arises For Consideration Are The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Engaged Inter Alia In The Business Of Installation & Commissioning Services. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income ('Rol') Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act') On October 31, 2007 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs 3,05,04,940 On Which Taxes Of Rs 1,02,67,963 Were Payable. On Account Of Credit For Taxes Deducted At Source (Tds') Amounting To Rs 1,21,26,857 & Self Assessment Tax Amounting To Rs 1,60,0000 A Page 2 Of 9 Refund Of Rs 34,58,894 Was Claimed. The Rol Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessment Was Concluded Vide Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated December 17, 2009 Wherein Income Returned By The Assessee In The Rol Was Accepted By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(3) (A0).

section 143(3) of the Act dated December 17, 2009 wherein income returned by the assessee in the Rol was accepted by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 12(3) (A0). 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee vide letter dated August 17, 2009 had filed additional TDS certificates, amounting to Rs 1,13

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIAVTE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) /OSD LTU , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. Page 22 of 23 ITA Nos. 1689 & 1690/Bang/2017 13

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) /OSD , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. Page 22 of 23 ITA Nos. 1689 & 1690/Bang/2017 13

M/S.METROPOLITAN MEDIA COMPANY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, HUBLI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

13 to 16 which is read as under : 7 8 9 We found the co-ordinate Bench of tribunal in ITA No.183/Bang/2014 Dt.27.05.2016 in ITO (TDS) Vs. Confident Projects (India) Ltd. has considered the Circular No.5 of 2016 of CBDT and observed on non-applicability of 10 provisions of Section

M/S. INFOSYS BPO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Padmavathy S

TDS under section 195A along with interest under section 244A of the Act. The CIT(A) rejected this stating that though the assessee is entitled to refund where it has paid more taxes than the due Page 6 of 13

THE RADDI SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA,DHARWAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HUBBALLI

In the result, the impugned order could not be faulted with

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2014-15

TDS under section 194A. 3. A question has also been raised as to whether normal members, associate members and sympathizer members are also covered by the exemption under section 194A(3)(v). It is hereby clarified that the exemption is available only to such members who have joined in application for the registration of the cooperative society and those

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.413/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

TDS under section 195 of the Act are not applicable. IT(TP)A No.413/Bang/2022 Hewlett Packard (India) Software Operation Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 13

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTPU , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS was not made. For this reason alone assessee's grounds can to be allowed. Considering the facts and reasons stated above assessee's grounds are allowed. 13

INFOSYS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

TDS under Section 195 of the 14 IT(TP)A Nos.102 & 233/Bang/2013 Infosys Limited Act. Respectfully, following the aforesaid decisions in the cases of CIT Vs. Synopsys International Old Ltd. (supra) and CIT Vs. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (supra), we uphold the disallowance made by the authorities below, of software expenses of Rs.11,94,50,304 paid to overseas entities

INFOSYS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2006-07 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

TDS thereon. We find that in the F.Y. 2005-06 relevant to A.Y. 2006-07, the year under consideration, there was no liability to deduct tax at source under Section 194J of the Act in respect of software expenses paid to Indian entities as the term ‘royalty’ in Sec. 194J of the Act was introduced by the Taxation Laws Amendment

M/S. INFOSYS BPO LINITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 986/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy M/S. Infosys Bpo Ltd., Commissioner Of Electronic City, Income Tax, Hosur Road, International Taxation, Bangalore – 560 100. Vs. Circle 1 (1), Pan: Aaccp4478N Bangalore. (Appellant) (Respondent) & It(It)A No. 990/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Deputy M/S. Infosys Bpo Ltd., Commissioner Of Electronic City, Income Tax, Hosur Road, International Taxation, Bangalore – 560 100. Vs. Circle 1 (1), Pan: Aaccp4478N Bangalore. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Ca Shri Priyadarshi Misra, Addl. Respondent By : Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2021 Order Per Beena Pillai

13 instead of applying Article 15 of India — Poland DTAA 2.2 The learned CIT(A) 12, Bangalore has erred in not appreciating that the payments to non residents were not chargeable to tax under the DTAA and consequently not liable for TDS u/s 195. 3.0 Rate of 20% u/s 206AA is not applicable for grossing up u/s 195A