M/S. BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Brigade Enterprises Ltd., 26/1, 30Th Floor Wtc, The Dy. Commissioner Of Dr. Rajkumar Road, Income-Tax, Malleshwaram, Circle-2(3), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Vs. Bengaluru-560 100. Pan – Aaacb 7459 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri P.C Kincha, C.A Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30/08/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. General Ground 1.1. The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["Cit(A) For Short Hereinafter"] To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Disallowance Under Section 14A R.W. Rule 8D 2.1. The Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle - 2(3), Bangalore ["Ao" For Short Hereinafter] Has Erred In Making A Disallowance Of Rs. 2,02,22,837/- Under Se Tion 14A Comprising Of Disallowa,,Ø-1S. 1,73,98,969/- Under Rule 8D(2)(Ii) & Rs. 28,23,868/- Under Rule 8D(2)(Iii) & The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Said Disallowance.

capital expenditure is allowable. Page 12 of 25 5.5 We note that in the preceding four assessment years, the Ld.AO did not disallow the expenses under section 35D. As the nature of expenditure is not disputed by the Ld.AO, and that the section allows amortisation of such expenses that have been incurred towards expansion/extension of the undertaking, it could

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

5\nlays down the scope of the total income.\nWhile computing the total income, certain incomes are exempted which are not to be\nincluded and these are mentioned in Section 10 of the Act.\n8. Section 14 of the Act is the next provision which is relevant for these appeals.\nIt is the first provision in Chapter IV which

M/S. SHRI MAHISHASURAMARDINI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HAVERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WRD-1, HAVERI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

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

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

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

gains in labor productivity in services. (refer p 472-473 of DRPB) 10. Hence, it was felt that the unusual path may lead to vulnerability of Indian Economy to ups and downs of global economy. The reason being service industries are foot loose industries where as manufacturing industries are not. In addition, employment growth is inadequate and is not matching

KARNATAKA TELECOM DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME OF TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), BLR, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital maintained in savings bank accounts through which the credit operations of the assessee were carried out and, therefore, was attributable to the business of providing credit facilities to members and assessable as business income. 11.1 The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the deduction under section 80P only to income assessed under

KARNATAKA TELECOM DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4),BLR, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital maintained in savings bank accounts through which the credit operations of the assessee were carried out and, therefore, was attributable to the business of providing credit facilities to members and assessable as business income. 11.1 The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the deduction under section 80P only to income assessed under

KARNATAKA TELECOM DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), BLR, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

capital maintained in savings bank accounts through which the credit operations of the assessee were carried out and, therefore, was attributable to the business of providing credit facilities to members and assessable as business income. 11.1 The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the deduction under section 80P only to income assessed under

WIPRO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80A; IT(TP)A No.370/Bang/2021 Page 33 of 110 (iii) any transfer of goods or services referred to in sub-section (8) of section 80-IA; (iv) any business transacted between the assessee and other person as referred to in sub-section (10) of section 80-IA; (v) any transaction, referred to in any other section under Chapter

M/S. WIPRO LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2556/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16

80A; (iii) any transfer of goods or services referred to in sub-section (8) of section 80-IA; IT(TP)A No.2556/Bang/2019 M/s. Wipro Limited, Bangalore Page 30 of 85 (iv) any business transacted between the assessee and other person as referred to in sub-section (10) of section 80-IA; (v) any transaction, referred to in any other section

M/S SAP LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.CIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri. Abraham P. Georgei.T(Tp).A No.1006/Bang/2011 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S. Sap Labs India P. Ltd, No.138, Export Promotion Industrial Park, Whitefield, Bengaluru 560 066 .. Appellant Pan : Aafcs3649P

80A(4) of the Act, would apply only to profit linked deductions. There can be no dispute that deduction under Section 10A of the Act, is profit linked. In so far as deduction u/s.80JJA is concerned, a look at sub- section (1) of the said section is required, which is reproduced below : 80JJAA(1) : Where the gross total income

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

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

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

5. Similarly, the Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Gujarat Vs. Keshavlal Chandulal reported in 1966(LIX) ITR 120 has observed that “where a person disposes of his goods at a lesser value than their market price, or at a concessional price, there is nothing in the income tax law which compels him to sell

M/S. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(5) PRESENTLY CIRCLE 4(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

80A(2) and section 80B(5) and also as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Synco Industries Ltd. v. AO & Other (reported in 299 ITR 444), it is seen that the deduction under Chapter VIA has to be given out of the gross total income calculated as per the provisions of Income

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S SAP LAB INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 623/Bang/2016 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Sap Lab Pvt. Ltd., 2011-12 Income Tax, 138, Export Promotion Circle - 6(1)(1), Industrial Park, Whitefield, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aafcs 3649 P 566/Bang/2016 M/S. Sap Lab Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of 2011-12 Bengaluru – 560 066. Income Tax, Pan : Aafcs 3649 P Circle - 6(1)(1), Bengaluru.

5 of 25 DRP, the AO passed the final order of assessment. To the extent the assessee did not get relief from the DRP, the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The relevant provisions of the Act in so far as comparability of international transaction with a transaction of similar nature entered into between unrelated parties, provides

M/S SAP LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 623/Bang/2016 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Sap Lab Pvt. Ltd., 2011-12 Income Tax, 138, Export Promotion Circle - 6(1)(1), Industrial Park, Whitefield, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aafcs 3649 P 566/Bang/2016 M/S. Sap Lab Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of 2011-12 Bengaluru – 560 066. Income Tax, Pan : Aafcs 3649 P Circle - 6(1)(1), Bengaluru.

5 of 25 DRP, the AO passed the final order of assessment. To the extent the assessee did not get relief from the DRP, the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The relevant provisions of the Act in so far as comparability of international transaction with a transaction of similar nature entered into between unrelated parties, provides

DCIT vs. M/S SAP LABS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

80A(4) of the Act, would apply only to profit linked deductions. There can be no dispute that deduction under Section 10A of the Act, is profit linked. In so far as deduction u/s.80JJA IT(TP)A Nos.981 & 1070/Bang/2013 Page 11 of 51 is concerned, a look at sub-section (1) of the said section is required, which is reproduced

SAP LABS INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T.,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

80A(4) of the Act, would apply only to profit linked deductions. There can be no dispute that deduction under Section 10A of the Act, is profit linked. In so far as deduction u/s.80JJA IT(TP)A Nos.981 & 1070/Bang/2013 Page 11 of 51 is concerned, a look at sub-section (1) of the said section is required, which is reproduced

LOGIX MICROSYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(Tp)A No.453/Bang/2015 & It(Tp)A No.186/Bang/2016 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

80A(2) of the Act, cannot be sustained. We therefore hold that deduction u/s.10A of the Act has to be allowed without setting off losses of non-10A unit before allowing the deduction under section 10A of the Act. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the AO is directed

LOGIX MICROSYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(Tp)A No.453/Bang/2015 & It(Tp)A No.186/Bang/2016 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12

80A(2) of the Act, cannot be sustained. We therefore hold that deduction u/s.10A of the Act has to be allowed without setting off losses of non-10A unit before allowing the deduction under section 10A of the Act. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the AO is directed