M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

section 23 are now well-settled and if the value returned is not in accordance with such principles, it is open to the assessee to contend that the value as may be determined upon correct application of the law should form the basis of assessment. The revenue authorities, in our view, cannot be heard to say that merely because

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S SANDISK INDIA DEVICE DESIGN CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

153(1) of the Act. We are of the view that the material on record shows that an order of reference had been made under section 92CA of the Act on 18.02.2013 and therefore the contention that the reference was made after 2 years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year and therefore the Order of Assessment is barred

SAN DISK INDIA DEVICE DESIGN CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

153(1) of the Act. We are of the view that the material on record shows that an order of reference had been made under section 92CA of the Act on 18.02.2013 and therefore the contention that the reference was made after 2 years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year and therefore the Order of Assessment is barred

SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, grounds 22 to 22

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.418/Bang/2015 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.596/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 M/S.Sigma Aldrich Chemicals The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No.12, Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Bommasandra-Jagani Link Road, Bommasandra Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 100. Pan : Aahcs1882L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Tata Krishna, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 11.07.2022 Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Final Assessment Order Dated 19.01.2015 & 28.01.2016 For Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012, Respectively. Common Issues Are Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

153 of the Act C Extension of period of limitation in 12 months case reference is made under section 92CA of the Act. D Proceeding for assessment should be 31.12.2019 completed on / before this date E A date prior to the date on which 30.12.2019 period of limitation expires (stated in Sr.No.C) F Sixty day period expires

SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, grounds 22 to 22

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.418/Bang/2015 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 It(Tp)A No.596/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 M/S.Sigma Aldrich Chemicals The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No.12, Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bangalore. Bommasandra-Jagani Link Road, Bommasandra Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 100. Pan : Aahcs1882L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Tata Krishna, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 11.07.2022 Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Final Assessment Order Dated 19.01.2015 & 28.01.2016 For Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012, Respectively. Common Issues Are Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

153 of the Act C Extension of period of limitation in 12 months case reference is made under section 92CA of the Act. D Proceeding for assessment should be 31.12.2019 completed on / before this date E A date prior to the date on which 30.12.2019 period of limitation expires (stated in Sr.No.C) F Sixty day period expires

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153 has also been done away with in a case covered by Section 153A. With all the stops having been pulled, out, the Assessing Officer finder Section 153A has been entrusted with the duty of bringing to tax the total income of an assessee whose case is covered by Section 153A, by even making reassessments without any fetters, if need

MOHAMMED MUJEEB SIKANDER,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE (1), MANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

153 has also been done away with in a case covered by Section 153A. With all the stops having been pulled, out, the Assessing Officer finder Section 153A has been entrusted with the duty of bringing to tax the total income of an assessee whose case is covered by Section 153A, by even making reassessments without any fetters, if need

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

section 250 of the Act and hear the same on merits for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 5. He also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION Vs MST. KATIJI AND OTHERS reported in (1987) 167 ITR 471, in the case of CONCORD OF INDIA INSURANCE

UNITED SPIRITS LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, all these four appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

TDS), Circle – 18 (2), Bangalore Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocates Revenue by : Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, JCIT Date of hearing : 22-08-2016 Date of pronouncement : 17-10-2016 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these four appeals are filed by the assessee and these are directed against four separate orders of learned

SRI. SAKALA NARASIMHULU CHETTY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.117/Bang/2016 is allowed, whereas all other appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

TDS, Advance-tax and taxes paid u/s.140A of the Act, if any, and after giving credit only to such payment, he ought to have calculated the interest if any, leviable u/s.234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, as the levy under these sections though mandatory are compensatory in nature ITA Nos.117 to 125/Bang/2015 Page 4 of 11 having regard

SRI. SAKALA NARASIMHULU CHETTY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, ITA No.117/Bang/2016 is allowed, whereas all other appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

TDS, Advance-tax and taxes paid u/s.140A of the Act, if any, and after giving credit only to such payment, he ought to have calculated the interest if any, leviable u/s.234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, as the levy under these sections though mandatory are compensatory in nature ITA Nos.117 to 125/Bang/2015 Page 4 of 11 having regard

IBM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

TDS was effectuated. The said amount was disallowed by the Ld.AO u/s. 40(a)(i) which was upheld by the DRP. The Ld.AO observed that Page 5 of 19 assessee had claimed provision for obsolescence amounting to Rs.4,96,52,000/- which was disallowed. Thus the total addition made by the Ld.AO in the final assessment order including the transfer

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO LTD,, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered

M/S WIPRO LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, all 6 appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS u/s 194 of the Act having been deducted, section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" [Question of law No.2 in ITA Nos.210 & 211/2009 - (Department's appeal)] 171. The said substantial questions of law arose for consideration in the assessee's case itself in ITA 507/02 which was decided on 25.8.2010 where the substantial question of law was answered