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

loss can be adjusted against profits arising from non-SEZ/non-STPI units. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee. 5. Issue No.2 relates to Exclusion of Miscellaneous income while computing deduction u/s 10A/10AA/10B:- 5.1 The next issue relates to denial of deduction u/s 10A/10AA/10B in respect of miscellaneous income disclosed by eligible undertakings. This issue has been

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

loss can be adjusted against profits arising from non-SEZ/non-STPI units. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee. 5. Issue No.2 relates to Exclusion of Miscellaneous income while computing deduction u/s 10A/10AA/10B:- 5.1 The next issue relates to denial of deduction u/s 10A/10AA/10B in respect of miscellaneous income disclosed by eligible undertakings. This issue has been

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

set off of short-term capital loss as claimed by the assessee. Hence, the ground of appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed. Coming to assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 2195/Bang/2025 for A.Y. 2021-22 11. The effective issue raised by the assessee is that

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

loss (STCL) against long-term capital gains (LTCG) for AY 2019-20. The CPC disallowed this set-off, affecting the deduction under Section 80G. For AY 2021-22, the assessee claimed TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS BPO LTD, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt.Beena Pillai

loss against the profits of STPI unit’s in ratio of turnover and to grant set of against such profit before computing deduction under section 10 A in respect of such unit. Accordingly this ground raised by assessee stands partly allowed. 24. Ground No. 7 is in respect of brand building expenses claimed by assessee. The authorities below has held

M/S MCML SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

setting off the losses of the Non-STPI Units against the profits of the STPI Units. According to the learned AR, it is settled principle that deduction under section 10A of the Act has to be computed on the enhanced assessed business income; including the additions made to the returned business income; and in this regard placed reliance

M/S MCML SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

setting off the losses of the Non-STPI Units against the profits of the STPI Units. According to the learned AR, it is settled principle that deduction under section 10A of the Act has to be computed on the enhanced assessed business income; including the additions made to the returned business income; and in this regard placed reliance

M/S MCML SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

setting off the losses of the Non-STPI Units against the profits of the STPI Units. According to the learned AR, it is settled principle that deduction under section 10A of the Act has to be computed on the enhanced assessed business income; including the additions made to the returned business income; and in this regard placed reliance

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NSL SUGARS LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri A K Garodiaassessment Year : 2011-12

set off against loss suffered from another and the profit is required to be computed as if profit making industrial undertaking was the only source of income, has no merits. Sec. 80-I(1) lays down the broad parameters indicating circumstances under which an assessee would be entitled to claim deduction. On the other hand s. 80-I(6) deals

M/S NSL SUGARS LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri A K Garodiaassessment Year : 2011-12

set off against loss suffered from another and the profit is required to be computed as if profit making industrial undertaking was the only source of income, has no merits. Sec. 80-I(1) lays down the broad parameters indicating circumstances under which an assessee would be entitled to claim deduction. On the other hand s. 80-I(6) deals

STERLING COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

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

losses of non-10A units against profits of 10A units before allowing deduction u/s. 10A of the Act. 38. Gr.No.10 raised by the Assessee reads as follows: 10 Grant of lower deduction under section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 The learned AO has erred and the Honorable DRP has further erred in confirming the computation of deduction

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBALSOFT PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

set up in India and as such development of software should be pursuant to the contract between the client and the eligible unit. 2.12 The assessee company has also claimed that a similar treatment of reduction of foreign currency expenses from Export turnover had been rejected in the case of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd for Asst. year

HEWLETT-PACKARD GLOBALSOFT PRIVATE LIMTIED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

set up in India and as such development of software should be pursuant to the contract between the client and the eligible unit. 2.12 The assessee company has also claimed that a similar treatment of reduction of foreign currency expenses from Export turnover had been rejected in the case of M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd for Asst. year

SHRI. ANANTULA VIJAY MOHAN ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu\Nand\Nshri Keshav Dubey\Nita Nos.2059 & 2060/Bang/2024\N Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18\Nanantula Vijay Mohan\N9, Banjara Avenue Road\Nno.1, Banjara Hills\Nhyderabad 500 034\Npan No: Aelpm6515K\Nappellant\Nvs.\Nvs.\Ndcit\Ncircle-6(1)(1)\Nbangalore\Nrespondent\Nsp No.67/Bang/2024\N(Arising Out Of Ita No.2060/Bang/2024)\N Assessment Year: 2017-18\Nanantula Vijay Mohan\N9, Banjara Avenue Road\Nno.1, Banjara Hills\Nhyderabad 500 034\Npan No: Aelpm6515K\Nappellant\Ndcit\Ncircle-6(1)(1)\Nbangalore\Nrespondent\Nappellant By\Nrespondent By\Nsri Padma Khincha, A.R.\Nsri Sridhar E., D.R.\Ndate Of Hearing\N: 18.02.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement: 07.05.2025\Norder\Nper Laxmi Prasad Sahu:\Nthese Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed\Nagainst The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Both Dated 23.09.2024\Nvide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1068988279(1)\Nfor The Assessment Year 2016-17 & Vide Din & Order\Nno.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1068999127(1) For The Assessment\Nyear 2017-18 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short\N'The Act'). Since Both These Appeals & The Stay Petition Are Of The\Nsame Assessee For The Different Assessment Years, These Are Clubbed\Ntogether, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For\Nthe Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.\Nita No.2059/Bang/2024 (Ay 2016-17):\N2. First, We Take Up Ita No.2059/Bang/2024 For The Ay 2016-\N17 Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:\N1. General\N1.

set off against capital gain from acquisition of smartplay\nstartup by aricent, which in our opinion was not identified for\nexamination under the limited scrutiny. The sole basis of the\nassessment is completely based on the AO's presumption that there\nis a artificial arrangement to generate capital loss whereas the case\nwas selected for the examination of whether refund

M/S INFOSYS BPM LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year:2009-10

loss should be set off against the income declared under income from other sources, yet he could not furnish credible reasons to interfere with the reasoning given by Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the view taken by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 6. The next issue relates to disallowance of software expenses

TYCO FIRE AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Acit, M/S. Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, Rmz Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 0087 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

set off in future. 48. The short term capital loss on sale of shares and debentures was not accepted by the AO and the CIT(A). On short term capital loss on sale of equity shares of Aigua India by Assessee to Jitendra G.Bhanot, at nominal value, the AO relied on the valuation report of sprinkler business at the time

M/S HIRSCH BRACELET INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2015-16

TDS was made on it. Regarding the submissions on recomputation of Capital gains and set off of brought forward business losses

DEV KUMAR ROY ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

set out in the said section. The Tribunal on an appreciation of the evidence has firstly found that the building was used by the assessee mainly for his residential purpose. Taking into consideration the area of the building under the occupation of the assessee, it has stated that the ground floor occupied by the assessee including the garage

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S EPSILON ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

Set aside. 3. The Ld.CIT should have appreciated the fact that the assessment order under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed without passing a speaking order against the objections raised by the assessee. 4. The CIT ought to have considered the fact that the AO has passed an assessment order without appreciating the facts and details