EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

14 of 53 goodwill were acquired and duly recorded in the books of accounts at fair value based on an independent valuation report. 24.1 The appellant claimed depreciation on such intangible assets under section

M/S VOLVO INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

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

14. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the specified intangible assets acquired under slump sale agreement were in the nature of "business or commercial rights of similar nature" specified in Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act and were accordingly eligible for depreciation

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

section 32 of the Act from F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to\nA.Y. 2015-16 till the year under consideration in the following manner:\nΑ.Υ. Opening WDV Addition\nTotal assets Depreciation\nat 25% (Rs.)\nClosing WDV\n(Rs.)\nduring\nthe (Rs.)\nyear (Rs.)\n2015\n-16\n412,05,36,13\n2\n412,05,36,13\n2\n103

BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raobangalore International Airport Ltd. Administration Block, Bial, Devanahalli Bangalore-560 300. … Appellant Pan:Aabc8973D Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Respondent & Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. Bangalore International Airport Ltd. Bangalore-560 300. … Respondent

section is clear and does not admit of any doubt, we are not persuaded to interpret it in the way, the ld. DR impresses upon us to do. 14. The authorities below have concluded that year-wise determination of the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raobangalore International Airport Ltd. Administration Block, Bial, Devanahalli Bangalore-560 300. … Appellant Pan:Aabc8973D Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Respondent & Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. Bangalore International Airport Ltd. Bangalore-560 300. … Respondent

section is clear and does not admit of any doubt, we are not persuaded to interpret it in the way, the ld. DR impresses upon us to do. 14. The authorities below have concluded that year-wise determination of the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation

WORLD COURIER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

depreciation on computer software at 60% and disallowed a sum of Rs.84,89,691/-. ITA Nos.1727, 1577/Bang/2017 Page 5 of 10 9. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. Learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance

WORLD COURIER (INDIA) PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose while the appeal for AY 2012-13 is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

depreciation on computer software at 60% and disallowed a sum of Rs.84,89,691/-. ITA Nos.1727, 1577/Bang/2017 Page 5 of 10 9. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. Learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance

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

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

depreciation. That the Ld. AO has erred on facts and in law in disallowing security deposit written off amounting to Rs. 14,68,800 under section

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

depreciation on intangible assets.\n20.\nThe relevant facts are that the assessee company entered 2\ndifferent business transferred agreement (BTA) with its holding company\nInfosys Ltd. The first BTA was entered as on 1st July 2014 i.e. during the\nF.Y. 2014-15 for transfer of Edge suit of product division for a\nconsideration of Rs. 421 crores. The second

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

depreciation on software purchase. 11. The Ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung Electronics Company Ltd. (supra) and accordingly held that the software purchase cost is in the nature of royalty and hence allowable as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, he has directed the A.O. to disallow the entire cost

M/S. SYNGENE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 6, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2010-11

14 of 29 Written Depreciable value Rate of Depreciation for down BloCk of assets of assets as at depreciation the year value as at March 31, 2009 31/03/2009 70,90,150 Building 7,87,795 10% 78,77,945 15% 3,98,06,151 59,70,923 3,38,35,228 Plant & machinery 20% - - Additional Depreciation Furniture and fixtures

BOSCH GLOBAL SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(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

14 3. The next issue raised by the assessee, as per grounds 2 & 3 of its appeal, is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of the claim for additional depreciation under Section

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

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

section 40 refers to the outgoing amount chargeable under the act, and subject to TDS under Chapter XVII-B. 14. On the contrary, depreciation