M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

194H of the IT Act. In the light of these facts, we are of the considered view that the assessee is required to deduct the TDS on the amount retained by the Airlines while making the payment to the assessee. Our attention was also invited to the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, according to which

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

194H of the IT Act. In the light of these facts, we are of the considered view that the assessee is required to deduct the TDS on the amount retained by the Airlines while making the payment to the assessee. Our attention was also invited to the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, according to which

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

194H of the IT Act. In the light of these facts, we are of the considered view that the assessee is required to deduct the TDS on the amount retained by the Airlines while making the payment to the assessee. Our attention was also invited to the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, according to which

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

194H of the IT Act. In the light of these facts, we are of the considered view that the assessee is required to deduct the TDS on the amount retained by the Airlines while making the payment to the assessee. Our attention was also invited to the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, according to which

M/S TE CONNECTIVITY INDIA PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU,CIRCLE-1, , BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

194H of the Act. It was also submitted that the Assessee’s stand on identical payment that it was not in the nature of Commission attracting the provisions of Sec.194 H of the Act was accepted by the AO in AY 2015-16 and no disallowance was made. The learned DR relied on the order

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T.A No.846/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 5(1)(1), Bangalore .. Appellant V. M/S. Royal Orchid Hotels P. Ltd, No.1, Gold Avenue, Adjoining Kga Gold Course, Old Airport Road, Kodihalli, Bangalore 560 008 .. Respondent Pan : Aabcr0111M Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jcit Heard On : 29.10.2015 Pronounced On : 10.11.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

capital asset as such was brought into existence, the slab over the drain could have been used by the assessee for parking the cars, since one side of the drain was assessee’s hotel building and the other side was the car parking. Thus according to him, CIT (A) fell in error in allowing the claim of the assessee

M/S TE CONNECTIVITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 LTPU , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for 37

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.3373/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Te Park, 22B, Doddenakundi Corporation, 2Nd Circle - 2, Large Taxpayer Unit, Phase, Industrial Area, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 7374 C Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sriram Seshadri, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 22.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

194H of the 31-36] Act. 14.3. The lower authorities erred in not appreciating that no disallowance shall be made under section 40(a) of the Act where the payee (in this case, the recipient of discounts) has remitted the taxes due in respect of the payments made towards the expenditure incurred by the payer. 15. Short grant

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

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Dell International Services The Additional Commissioner India Private Limited Of Income-Tax (Ltu) V. Bangalore. Divyashree Greens, Sy.Nos.12/1, 12/2A & 13/1A,Challaghatta Village,Varthur Hobli Bengaluru – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.T.Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Praveen Karanth, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 30.11.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading In Computer Systems Including Support & Maintenance Services & Leasing Of Computers. For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 30.11.2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.22,31,24,760. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice U/S 143(2) Of The I.T.Act Was Issued On 2 It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017. M/S.Dell International Services India Private Limited. 11.09.2014. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That The International Transactions Entered By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprises (Aes) Had Exceeded The Prescribed Limit, Hence, The Matter Was Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Determine The Arm’S Length Price (Alp) Of The Said Transaction. The Tpo Passed Order U/S 92Ca Of The I.T.Act On 19.10.2016. In The Said Order, The Tpo Had Proposed Following Adjustments:-

capital, (iv) risk profile and (v) capacity adjustment to account between the Appellant and the comparable companies. 6. Variation of 3% from the arithmetic mean The Ld. AO and Ld. TPO erred in law in not granting the benefits of proviso to section 92C(2) of the Act available to the Appellant. 7. Relief 7 IT(TP)A No.2835/Bang/2017. M/s.Dell

M/S SYNDICATE BANK,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, UDUPI

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

capital gain tax can be levied. " 53. Concluded at page 12 para 21 as under: "27. In the result, we hold that sub-section 115JB as it stood prior to its amendment by virtue of Finance Act, 2012, would not be applicable to a banking company. We answer the question No. 2 in favour of the assessee and against

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

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying on any separate

DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

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

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

capital adjustment to account between the Appellant and the comparable companies. 8. Variation of 5% from the arithmetic mean The AO/ TPO erred in law in not granting the benefits of proviso to section 92C(2) of the Act available to the Appellant. 9. Relief The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant all such relief arising from

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

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

capital adjustment to account between the Appellant and the comparable companies. 8. Variation of 5% from the arithmetic mean The AO/ TPO erred in law in not granting the benefits of proviso to section 92C(2) of the Act available to the Appellant. 9. Relief The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant all such relief arising from

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

194H, 1941, 194J — relevant Sections under which TDS was required to be deducted by the assessee. These factors necessarily requires to be addressed by the Tribunal keeping in mind the provisions of the Act as well as the legal principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Courts. If the deduction is not claimed for the expenditures made in the provision even

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BANGALORE vs. M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

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

capital and (iv) risk profile adjustment to account between the Appellant and the comparable companies. 8. Variation of 5% from the arithmetic mean • The Ld. AO and Ld. TPO erred in law in not granting the benefits of proviso to section 92C(2) of the Act available to the Appellant. 9. Relief • The Appellant prays that

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

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

capital and (iv) risk profile adjustment to account between the Appellant and the comparable companies. 8. Variation of 5% from the arithmetic mean • The Ld. AO and Ld. TPO erred in law in not granting the benefits of proviso to section 92C(2) of the Act available to the Appellant. 9. Relief • The Appellant prays that

DELL INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

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

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

capital adjustment. 24. Warranty Cost 24.1 The learned AO / learned TPO / Hon'ble DRP erred in not following the directions given by the Hon'ble DRP and arbitrarily identifying the warranty cost recoverable and imposing a mark- up on the said warranty cost. 24.2 The learned AO / learned TPO / Hon'ble DRP erred in not considering the fact that

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

capital at risk (or) take any other strategic decisions. Accordingly, no single promoter group has "control/influence" over decisions of the board. Based on the above facts, our tax auditors have also not considered Force India as an associated enterprise of UBL. Consequently, we request your good self not to consider Force India as an Associated Enterprise of United breweries Limited

ACIT, HUBLI vs. KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEEN BANK, DHARWAD

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall be made in respect of such excess. Explanation.—In this clause,— (a) “specified entity” means,— (i) a financial corporation specified in section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956); (ii) a financial corporation which is a public sector company; (iii) a banking

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

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

capital adjustment is to be made by placing reliance on the order of the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Lam Research ITA Nos.2219, 2220, 2587/Bang/2017 and 3168/Bang/2018 Page 33 of 51 India Private Limited (supra) is correct and no interference is called for. It is ordered accordingly.” 58. In view of the above order