M/S INFOSYS LTD ,BANGALOR E vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

269,31,41,150 under section 40(a)(i) for not deducting tax at source in respect of the said payments. On facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable, impugned disallowance under section 40(a)(i) should be deleted in entirety. Levy of interest under section 234B :- The learned CIT(A) has erred in 12. confirming the action

TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR P LTD,RAMANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

section 194J and Rs. 64,55,074/- u/s. 194C. He has also placed reliance on another tribunal order rendered in the case of M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA No. 3/Bang/2015 dated 25.05.2016 copy available on pages 257 to 269 of paper book and pointed out that in this case, the Tribunal has followed the earlier

HEWLETT PACKARD (INDIA) SOFTWARE OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED,2016-17 vs. 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.213/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17

269/- with respect to the international transactions undertaken by the Appellant, under section 92CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 1.2. The learned AO/ learned TPO/ Hon'ble DRP erred in rejecting the Transfer Pricing ("TP") documentation maintained by the Appellant by invoking provisions of sub-section (3) of section 92C of the Act. 1.3. The learned

SIRI SANJEEVINI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMAT,SIRWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, RAICHUR

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. 4. The Chartered Accountant sought for consent to file an appeal against the CIT(A) order in so far as it was against the appellant. The appellant informed the Chartered Accountant that it will place the agenda for discussion in the next board meeting. 5. The appellant submits that an order under section

SIRI SANJEEVINI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMAT ,SIRWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , RAICHUR

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. 4. The Chartered Accountant sought for consent to file an appeal against the CIT(A) order in so far as it was against the appellant. The appellant informed the Chartered Accountant that it will place the agenda for discussion in the next board meeting. 5. The appellant submits that an order under section

M/S. NARAYANA MINES PRIVATE LIMITED,HOSAPETE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

269, 4th Ward, Patel Nagar, tax, Hosapete-583 201. TDS Circle, Vs. Hubballi. PAN – AABCN 0328 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl. CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 10.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals filed by the assessee

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), MYSORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

269 (SC). 20. The appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal to file additional submission at the time of hearing of this appeal. 21. It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal takes a lenient and compassionate view and condone the delay of 393 days in filing the present appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED ,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, , MYSORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

269 (SC). 20. The appellant craves leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal to file additional submission at the time of hearing of this appeal. 21. It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal takes a lenient and compassionate view and condone the delay of 393 days in filing the present appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner

SURENDRA LAXMANRAO VAIDYA,GADAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GADAG

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Surendra Laxmanrao Vaidya, Kariyamma Kallu Badavane, Near Hatalgeri Naka, Gadag. ….Appellant Pan Avupv2546H Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Gadag. ……Respondent.

TDS was also deducted by Chief Accounts Officer, Bagalkot. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee has disclosed his share of enhanced compensation of Rs.2,02,95,269 and claimed exemption under Section

M/S. BIESSE MANUFACTURING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

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

269 of PB. The ld. AR further submitted that the receivables are in foreign currency and therefore the DRP erred in applying the short term deposit rate of SBI for the purpose of charging notional interest. 12. The ld. DR relied on the orders of lower authorities. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record

M/S. MONARCH PLAZA COMFORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita No.1644 & 1645/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the additions made by the Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 5. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs.1,95,382/-, being credit card commission charges paid to bank. However, confirmed the additional profits in the hands of the assessee for years under consideration as computed

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S. TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S TEJATS NETWORKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute

M/S INFOSYS BPM LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

TDS under section 195 of the Income-tax Act. The answer to this question will apply to all four categories of cases enumerated by us in paragraph 4 of this judgment.” It is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has reversed the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung Electronics