DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NOUS INFO SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaramani.T.A No.63/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -5(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Nous Info Systems P. Ltd, No.1, 1St Main, 1St Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru 560 004 .. Respondent Pan : Aaacn4584B Assessee By : Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Vijaykumar N, Addl. Cit Heard On : 14.09.2016 Pronounced On : 11 .11.2016 O R D E R Per S. Jayaraman:

11A) against this intimation vide letter dated 14 February 2012 (acknowledgement of application dated 21 February 2012) as the export proceeds amounting to Rs.1,75,839/- were realised and brought into India as per section 10A of the Act. ITA.63/Bang/2016 Page - 3 2.2 Subsequently, a notice under section 148 dated 26 th March 2014 was issued. In response , revised return

M/S. PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED, ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

11A(4). To remove any doubts in this regard, it is reiterated\nthat any approval under section 80G(5) on or after 1.10.2009 would\nbe a one time approval which would be valid till it is withdrawn.\n5.1 As can be seen above, the existing approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of\nthe Act expiring on or after 1st October

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

depreciation has any bearing in determining the quantum of deduction allowable under Section 80/A of the Act? 36. In our opinion, the above question is no longer res-integra. The Apex Court in the case of M/s.Liberty India V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2009 (12) SCALE 51, held as under : "13 Before analyzing Section

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

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

11A) of the Act, held that the same should be considered as export turnover of the current year, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Wipro Ltd v CIT in ITA No. 879 of 2008 and other connected matters decision dated 25/3/2015. 6.1 As regards set off of loss

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

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

11A) of the Act, held that the same should be considered as export turnover of the current year, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Wipro Ltd v CIT in ITA No. 879 of 2008 and other connected matters decision dated 25/3/2015. 6.1 As regards set off of loss

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

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

11A) of the Act, held that the same should be considered as export turnover of the current year, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Wipro Ltd v CIT in ITA No. 879 of 2008 and other connected matters decision dated 25/3/2015. 6.1 As regards set off of loss

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation which assessee did not choose to adopt. Having not done so, he cannot seek any relief either under section 154 or under section 143(1) as Assessing Officer has necessarily to proceed on the basis of income declared in the return of income filed by the assessee. 5.8 Now coming to the case law relied by the Ld. Counsel

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

depreciation which assessee did not choose to adopt. Having not done so, he cannot seek any relief either under section 154 or under section 143(1) as Assessing Officer has necessarily to proceed on the basis of income declared in the return of income filed by the assessee. 5.8 Now coming to the case law relied by the Ld. Counsel

M/S. PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

11A(4). To remove any doubts in this regard, it is reiterated\nthat any approval under section 80G(5) on or after 1.10.2009 would\nbe a one time approval which would be valid till it is withdrawn.\n5.1 As can be seen above, the existing approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of\nthe Act expiring on or after 1st October