M/S.L.G PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of the I

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

80J was replaced by section 80IA of the I.T.Act). 5.3 The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 5.4 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has submitted that it is eligible for claim deduction under section 80lA of the I.T.Act in respect of the power generation unit

M/S I G PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of the I

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

80J was replaced by section 80IA of the I.T.Act). 5.3 The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 5.4 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has submitted that it is eligible for claim deduction under section 80lA of the I.T.Act in respect of the power generation unit

M/S.L.G PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of the I

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

80J was replaced by section 80IA of the I.T.Act). 5.3 The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 5.4 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has submitted that it is eligible for claim deduction under section 80lA of the I.T.Act in respect of the power generation unit

M/S.L.G PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of the I

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

80J was replaced by section 80IA of the I.T.Act). 5.3 The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 5.4 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has submitted that it is eligible for claim deduction under section 80lA of the I.T.Act in respect of the power generation unit

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

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

TDS on interest payments made to its members/deposit holders. Thus the addition made by the AO to the extent of Rs.1,68,68,976/- is not warranted and therefore the same was deleted.\niii) Further, as far as payments made on Audit fee of Rs.50,000/-\nand commission payment of Rs.5,12,299/-, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC

M/S. THOTA UTHPANNAGALA MARATA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA,DAVANAGERE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1), DAVANAGERE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

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

TDS of Rs.11,05,182/- was deducted. The Ld.AR submitted that, there is a clear nexus between the withdrawal and deposit of funds from OD account to Pragati Gramina Bank and that the interest earned was attributable to the business of assessee. He submitted that the purpose of depositing funds from OD account into Pragati Gramina bank was to maintain

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

TDS; but is a statutory deduction on an asset which is otherwise eligible for deduction of deprecation. Depreciation is not an outgoing expenditure and therefore, the provisions of sec. 40(a)(i) of the Act are not attracted on such deduction. This view has been fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

TDS; but is a statutory deduction on an asset which is otherwise eligible for deduction of deprecation. Depreciation is not an outgoing expenditure and therefore, the provisions of sec. 40(a)(i) of the Act are not attracted on such deduction. This view has been fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case

ARKA EDUSERVE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WAR-1(1)(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15

TDS amounts with Form no.26AS. It appears that the assessee was under the impression that the return of income could be filed anytime before 31.3.2015 and the tax audit report could also be filed along with return of income. According to Ld A.R, the assessee was under such bonafide belief and accordingly the explanations furnished by the assessee would constitute