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

section 32 of the Act relating to succession. The proviso applies only where depreciation is allowable to both the predecessor and successor. In the present case, the intangible assets were recognized for the first time by the assessee upon acquisition. Infosys Limited had not claimed depreciation on such assets ITA Nos.290 - 294/Bang/2025 Page 18

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

18 to the note to the Accounts (at Page 2662 of Paper Book Vol.-4). 31. As per section 2(42C) of the Act, Slump Sale means, the transfer of one or more undertakings as a result of the sale for a lump sum consideration without values being assigned to the individual assets and liabilities in such sales. There

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

18 of 55 Section 24A: Rights and liabilities of a holder of prospecting licence or mining lease. (i) On the issue of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease under this Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be lawful for the holder of such permit, licence or lease, his agents or his servants or workmen to enter

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

18 of 55 Section 24A: Rights and liabilities of a holder of prospecting licence or mining lease. (i) On the issue of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease under this Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be lawful for the holder of such permit, licence or lease, his agents or his servants or workmen to enter

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

18 of 55 Section 24A: Rights and liabilities of a holder of prospecting licence or mining lease. (i) On the issue of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease under this Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be lawful for the holder of such permit, licence or lease, his agents or his servants or workmen to enter

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

18 of 55 Section 24A: Rights and liabilities of a holder of prospecting licence or mining lease. (i) On the issue of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease under this Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be lawful for the holder of such permit, licence or lease, his agents or his servants or workmen to enter

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

18 of 55 Section 24A: Rights and liabilities of a holder of prospecting licence or mining lease. (i) On the issue of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease under this Act and the rules made thereunder, it shall be lawful for the holder of such permit, licence or lease, his agents or his servants or workmen to enter

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 claimed. The Commissioner (Appeals), confirmed the action of theAssessing Officer on the ground that the purchase of software amounted to acquisition of intangible asset and therefore, the payment was royalty and disallowable. On appeal: Held, (i) that mere purchase of software, a copyrighted article, for utilisation of computers cannot be considered as purchase of copyright and royalty. The assessee

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

18. In the present ground, the dispute is with regard to method of computing amount of loss or depreciation, whichever is less, for the purpose of setting off against declared book profit for the year. The provisions of section

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

18. In the present ground, the dispute is with regard to method of computing amount of loss or depreciation, whichever is less, for the purpose of setting off against declared book profit for the year. The provisions of section

M/S. INDUS TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

18-11-2024 in DIN\nNo.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070403769(1) for the assessment year\n2012-13.\n2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:\n“1.The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the\nappellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities,\nfacts and circumstances of the case.\n2. The learned

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

18,17,607) (6,02,43,275) Income / (Loss) returned 6,13,71,327 Additional depreciation 4,32,76,661 6,09,96,372 93,97,114 11,15,78,665 1,17,96,261 disallowed , M/s. Syngene International Limited, Bangalore Page 21 of 29 Income / (loss) after (6,85,40,946) 7,53,097 disallowance

DCIT vs. ING VYSYA BANK, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the 68

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ing Vysya House, Income Tax, No.22, M.G. Road, Circle 11(4), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan: Aabct 0529M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Income Tax, Bangalore – 560 001. Circle 11(4), Pan: Aabct 0529M Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A. Revenue By : Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan

depreciable asset and therefore Explanation 8 to section 43(1) of the Act will not be applicable at all. Secondly, it was submitted, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Corehealth Care Ltd. 298 ITR 194 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowings for acquisition of asset which

ING VYSYA BANK LTD. vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the 68

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ing Vysya House, Income Tax, No.22, M.G. Road, Circle 11(4), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan: Aabct 0529M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Income Tax, Bangalore – 560 001. Circle 11(4), Pan: Aabct 0529M Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A. Revenue By : Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan

depreciable asset and therefore Explanation 8 to section 43(1) of the Act will not be applicable at all. Secondly, it was submitted, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Corehealth Care Ltd. 298 ITR 194 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowings for acquisition of asset which

OUTSOURCEPARTNERS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, all appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazit(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.443/Bang/2016 M/S. Outsource Partners Dy. Commissioner Of 2011-12 International Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Tower 2D, Phase I, Vikas Circle-5(1)(2), Telecom Ltd., Bangalore. Vrindavan Tech Village, Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanahalli, Bangalore- 560087. Pan: Aaaco5734C No. 526/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Outsource Partners 2011-12 Income-Tax, International Pvt. Ltd., Circle-5(1)(2), Pan: Aaaco5734C Bangalore. No.535/Bang/2017 M/S. Outsource Partners Assistant Commissioner Of 2009-10 International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Pan: Aaaco5734C Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore.

depreciation adjustment be made in order to determine the ALP for the international transactions. 18. The next issue through ground No. 2.10 and 2.11 relate to the working capital adjustment and in this regard it has been repeatedly held by the Tribunal that working capital adjustment should be allowed while determining the ALP without putting any cap thereon. Therefore

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. OUTSOURCE PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, all appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazit(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.443/Bang/2016 M/S. Outsource Partners Dy. Commissioner Of 2011-12 International Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Tower 2D, Phase I, Vikas Circle-5(1)(2), Telecom Ltd., Bangalore. Vrindavan Tech Village, Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanahalli, Bangalore- 560087. Pan: Aaaco5734C No. 526/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Outsource Partners 2011-12 Income-Tax, International Pvt. Ltd., Circle-5(1)(2), Pan: Aaaco5734C Bangalore. No.535/Bang/2017 M/S. Outsource Partners Assistant Commissioner Of 2009-10 International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Pan: Aaaco5734C Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore.

depreciation adjustment be made in order to determine the ALP for the international transactions. 18. The next issue through ground No. 2.10 and 2.11 relate to the working capital adjustment and in this regard it has been repeatedly held by the Tribunal that working capital adjustment should be allowed while determining the ALP without putting any cap thereon. Therefore

ATOS IT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

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

18 3,364,205,123.16 3 Atos IT Outsourcing Services, LLC 34 USD 30/09/2015 30/10/2015 28/10/2015 206,004,443 28 5,768,124,409.32 4 Atos IT Outsourcing Services, LLC 50 USD 31/10/2015 30/11/2015 23/11/2015 197,147,060 23 4,534,382,377.47 5 Atos IT Outsourcing Services, LLC 66 USD 30/11/2015 30/12/2015 22/12/2015

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

depreciation or otherwise) in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" of any previous year.” 15.3 The relevant clause in present case is clause (iii) according to which any office appliance including the computer or computer software shall not be included in the “New asset” for purpose of this section. On careful perusal