CANARA BANK (ERSTWHILE SYNDICATE BANK),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including statement of profit and loss for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year. ITA Nos.937 & 938/Bang/2024 M/s. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore Page 13 of 20 41. In so far as Clause (a), the same applies to a case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. CANARA BANK, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear: 2017-18

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including statement of profit and loss for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year. 41. In so far as Clause (a), the same applies to a case of a company other than referred to in Clause (b). According to clause

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

M/S RAMBUS CHIP TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P.Boaz

194A, Section 194B, Section 194BB, Section 194C, Section 194D, Section 194E, Section 194EE, Section IT(TP)A Nos.23 & 61/Bang/20115 M/s.Rambus Chit Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd. Page 31 of 38 194F, Section 194G, Section 194H, Section 194-I, Section 194J, Section 194K,Section 194L, Section 195, Section 196A, Section 196B, Section 196C and Section 196D shall pay within the prescribed time

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S RAMBUS CHIP TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P.Boaz

194A, Section 194B, Section 194BB, Section 194C, Section 194D, Section 194E, Section 194EE, Section IT(TP)A Nos.23 & 61/Bang/20115 M/s.Rambus Chit Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd. Page 31 of 38 194F, Section 194G, Section 194H, Section 194-I, Section 194J, Section 194K,Section 194L, Section 195, Section 196A, Section 196B, Section 196C and Section 196D shall pay within the prescribed time

INFOSYS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

depreciation as the amount was only a provision. In support of these grounds (supra), the learned Authorised Representative placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of KPTCL Vs. DCIT (2016) 383 ITR 59 (Kar) and the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of TE Connectivity

ACIT, HUBLI vs. KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEEN BANK, DHARWAD

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

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

depreciation is claimed and allowed Therefore notwithstanding that in the balance feet it is shown as investment, for the purpose of Income Tax Act, it is shown as stock-in-trad. Therefore, the value of the stocks being closely connected with the stock market, at the end of the financial year, while valuing the assets, necessarily the Bank

ASST.C.I.T., MANGALORE vs. M/S THE SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,, MANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 194A(3)(v) of the Income- tax Act shall not apply to the payment of interest on time deposits by the co-operative banks to its members. As this amendment is effective from the prospective date of 1st June, 2015, the co-operative bank shall be required to deduct tax from the payment of interest on time deposits

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(1), MYSURU vs. SHRI. H OMKARAPPA (HUF), SHIVAMOGGA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2008-09 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri. H. Omkarappa, (Huf), Ward - 1, #3, A Block, Apmc Yard, Shivamogga Sagar Road, Shivamogga. Pan : Aabhh 1124 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Shri. S. Ramasubramanyam, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.03.2022 O R D E R

194A. However the assessee had not deducted tax before the end of the Financial Year ending on 31.03.2008 relevant to AY 2008-09. To sum up both deduction and deposit of tax was done during AY 2009-10. The assessee claims that as the tax was deposited to account of the Government before filing of RoI the expenditure is deductible

SHRI. G. MALLIKARJUNA NAIDU,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10

194A of the Act, assessee was required to deduct TDS for payment of interest on nonbanking financial companies, and hence disallowance of interest payment as per provisions of section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act was made. The Ld.AO also restricted depreciation

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

depreciation on goodwill is not allowable. Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed. 37. The next issue for adjudication is disallowance of expenses u/s. 14A of the Act on the following grounds:- Grounds relating to disallowance of expenses under section 14A: 4.1 The learned AO has erred in law and on facts in disallowing expenses of INR 70,66,372 in relation

SRI CHIDANAND GUDADANOOR ,HARPANAHALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

depreciation : Rs.14,56,575. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assessment dt.26.2.2016 for Assessment Year 2013-14, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (Appeals), Gulbarga, which was dismissed vide the impugned order dt.26.07.2016. 3. The assessee, being aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals), Gulbarga dt.26.7.2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14 has filed this appeal before