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 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature and the same does not require any separate adjudication. Hence, the same is dismissed infructuous. 71. Coming to the issue raised through additional ground of appeal regarding allowances of foreign tax as business expenditure. 72. At the outset, we note that the issue raised by the assessee in its grounds

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

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2008-09

section 234B and C while passing order giving effect to, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) after Page 4 of 16 considering the submissions, allowed the ground of assessee by holding as under: “5.2. Ground No.2 relates to the computation of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act, on account of certain additional income offered

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

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

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

M/S. BARBEQUE NATION HOSPITALITY LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2) , BENGALURU

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

depreciation on such sum on the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

KAWASAKI MICROELECTRONICS INC,BANGALORE vs. DDIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boaz

depreciation is disallowed resulting in an income, Kawasaki India, being a unit registered under the Software Technology Parks of India (STPI) Scheme and having satisfied the conditions prescribed under section 10A of the Act, is eligible to claim deduction under the aforesaid section. 6. The learned AO erred in levying interest of Rs.115.197 under sections 234B

MARVELL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Rahul Chaudharym/S. Marvell India Private Limited 10Th Floor, Tower D & E Global Technology Park, Marathahalli Outer Ring Road Devarabeesanahalli Village Varthurhobli Bangalore 560 103 ………. Appellant [Pan: Aaecm5559R]

234B and INR 9,20,335 under section 234C of the Act. 6. Penalty Proceedings 6.1. The learned AO has erred, in law and on facts, in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 270A of the Act.” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Assessee is a company engaged in design, development and testing

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.

section 234B of the Income tax Act, 1961. IT(TP)A Nos.443,526/Bang/2016, No.535/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 35 The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary any of the above grounds either before or at the time of hearing as we may be advised

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.

section 234B of the Income tax Act, 1961. IT(TP)A Nos.443,526/Bang/2016, No.535/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 35 The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary any of the above grounds either before or at the time of hearing as we may be advised

DINESH KUMAR SINGHI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

section 132(4) of the Act. No specific request for cross examination was made by the assessee. xvi. The quarterly and annual performance report submitted to SEZ the assessee declared that the unit has commenced production from the EOU only since 30/5/2006. From the about is clear that EOU was not established till 30/5/2006 and not entitled for deduction under

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 at the rate of 25%. 8.2 On facts and in the circumstances of the case and law applicable, brand building expenses of Rs. 33,65,47,924/- is to be fully allowed as deduction as claimed by the appellant. 9.1 The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) – I, Bangalore has erred in confirming disallowance under section 14A amounting

SHANKARANARAYANA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,SNS HOUSE, RESIDENCY ROAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU

In the result, this portion of appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted by the learned Commissioner of Income tax on which interest is levied are not discernible and are wrong on the facts of the case. 13. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute, change and delete

SHANKARANARAYANA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU

In the result, this portion of appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted by the learned Commissioner of Income tax on which interest is levied are not discernible and are wrong on the facts of the case. 13. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute, change and delete

SHANKARANARAYANA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), C R BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU

In the result, this portion of appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted by the learned Commissioner of Income tax on which interest is levied are not discernible and are wrong on the facts of the case. 13. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute, change and delete