DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S BIOWORTH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-11

capital loss of Rs.82,50,000 incurred in relation thereto. Hence, when the AO himself has accepted the sale price of Rs.130/share in respect of shares of M/s Kemwell Pvt Ltd sold on 26.09.2009, his action of partially disbelieving the loss incurred on sale of 15000 shares at the same price of Rs.130/share held on short term basis was wholly

M/S VIDAL HEALTH INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , BANGALORE

In the result appeals for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. O.P. Meena

194J(1) defines ‘royalty’, by referring to the meaning given in Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. For sake of convenience, Explanation 2 of section 9(1) (vi) is extracted hereunder : 'Explanation 2. - For the purposes of this clause, ‘royalty’ means consideration (including any lump sum consideration but excluding any consideration which would be the income

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA -BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised\ngrounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed for the years under consideration

gains of business &\nprofession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty\npaid, for use of computer software since it had failed to\ndeduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly,\nthe disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J\nof Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where\nTDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

MAHESH REDDY ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

gains of\nRs.7,12,17,657/- on which deduction of Rs.4,82,00,000/- had been claimed u/s 54F\nof the IT Act....\n4.3 Thus he submitted that it is grossly incorrect to initiate 263\nproceedings on the ground of no enquiry or inadequate inquiry.\nConsequently, the order of the AO dt.28.12.2019 is neither\nerroneous nor prejudicial to the interest

MAHESH REDDY,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

gains of\nRs.7,12,17,657/- on which deduction of Rs.4,82,00,000/- had been claimed u/s 54F\nof the IT Act....\n4.3 Thus he submitted that it is grossly incorrect to initiate 263\nproceedings on the ground of no enquiry or inadequate inquiry.\nConsequently, the order of the AO dt.28.12.2019 is neither\nerroneous nor prejudicial to the interest

M/S SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised\ngrounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed for the years under consideration

gains of business &\nprofession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty\npaid, for use of computer software since it had failed to\ndeduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly,\nthe disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J\nof Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where\nTDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY ,HUBBALLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), HUBALLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

194J of the Act instead of 194C of the Act, then the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be made. This view of ours is fortified by the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 447 ITR 299 wherein held that “where there

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

M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business & profession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty paid, for use of computer software since it had failed to deduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly, the disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where TDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CIRCLE - 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business & profession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty paid, for use of computer software since it had failed to deduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly, the disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where TDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA-BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business & profession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty paid, for use of computer software since it had failed to deduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly, the disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where TDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA-BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business & profession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty paid, for use of computer software since it had failed to deduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly, the disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where TDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R &D INSTITUTE INDIA- BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business & profession' in respect of computer software, i.e., royalty paid, for use of computer software since it had failed to deduct tax at source as required u/s 194J. Accordingly, the disallowance on account of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of Rs. 34,20,369/- representing software purchases where TDS was not effected, which works is disallowed

M/S UKN PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2011-12

gain of business or profession on which tax is deductible at source; but such tax has not been deducted. The expression 'amount payable' which is otherwise an allowable deduction refers to the expenditure incurred for the purpose of business of the assessee and therefore, the said expenditure is a deductible claim. Thus, section 40 refers to the outgoing amount chargeable

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

194J for the AY 2012-13, appeal was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Haveri: Cash Medical Benefit u/ s 192 Total TDS deductible Interest

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

194J for the AY 2012-13, appeal was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Haveri: Cash Medical Benefit u/ s 192 Total TDS deductible Interest

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

194J for the AY 2012-13, appeal was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Haveri: Cash Medical Benefit u/ s 192 Total TDS deductible Interest

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

194J for the AY 2012-13, appeal was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Haveri: Cash Medical Benefit u/ s 192 Total TDS deductible Interest

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

194J for the AY 2012-13, appeal was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Haveri: Cash Medical Benefit u/ s 192 Total TDS deductible Interest