FIBRES & FABRICS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 32(1) of the Act, and (ii) goodwill is not an asset whose value goes down with the passage of time, on the other hand, the value of goodwill grows with every year. Thus, the AO had not doubted the existence of goodwill, but the AO only denied the benefit of depreciation holding that it is not eligible

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S CORE OBJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove and appeal filed by revenue stands allowed partly

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.517/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

288, certifying that the deduction has been correctly claimed in accordance with the provisions of this section. Section 10B(6)(ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, in computing the total income of the assessee of the previous year relevant to the assessment year immediately succeeding the last of the relevant assessment year

M/S I & B SEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2015-16

section 32(l) of the Act. Therefore, there is no quarrel on the issue that goodwill is eligible for depreciation. However, the said judgment would not over- ride the other provisions of the Act, as in the case under consideration the value of goodwill itself is disputed by the AO. The assessee has called to justify the value of goodwill

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

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

depreciation as per Income Tax Act, and in view of the above said exposition it deserves that the deduction be granted with reference to profit and gain as expounded in the above said decision. 122. Now in this regard assessee’s contention is that provisions of section 80HH and section 10AA are pari materia. This has been disputed

IIFL SAMASTA FINANCE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2023-24 Iifl Samasta Finance Limited 110/3, Lalbagh Main Road Krishnappa Layout Dcit Vs. Bangalore 560 027 Circle 3(1)(1) Bangalore Pan No :Aaacc4577H Appellant Respondent

288” by the Finance Act, 2020, w.e.f. 01- 04-2020. Thus, as per Section 80JJAA(2)(c) of the Act, the assessee company must furnish the report of the Accountant in Form No. 10AD before the specified date referred to in Section 44AB of the Act. Now the Specified date referred to in Section 44AB

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

288 giving such particulars in the report as may be prescribed. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, the expressions,— (i) "additional wages" means the wages paid to the new regular workmen in excess of one hundred workmen employed during the previous year : Provided that in the case of an existing undertaking, the additional wages shall

JOINT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BANGALORE vs. M/S TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

288 giving such particulars in the report as may be prescribed. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, the expressions,— (i) "additional wages" means the wages paid to the new regular workmen in excess of one hundred workmen employed during the previous year : Provided that in the case of an existing undertaking, the additional wages shall

CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 32 of the Act. 6. Pursuant to the directions of the DRP, the AO passed the final assessment order dated 20.04.2021 in which the TP adjustment and disallowance of provision of warranty was retained. With regard to expenditure incurred on annual license fees, the Assessing Officer has not followed the directions issued by the DRP in allowing depreciation. Aggrieved

OPTO CIRCUITS INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

288 60[before the specified date referred to in section 44AB], certifying that the deduction has been correctly claimed in accordance with the provisions of this section. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, in computing the total income of the assessee of the previous year relevant to the assessment year immediately succeeding the last

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

depreciation in a proceedings under section\n153A of the Act is further bad in law as for some of the assessment\nyears scrutiny assessments have been completed under section\n143(3) of the Act and hence the question of disallowance of\ndepreciation invoking without any incriminating materials in\nsearch assessments are unsustainable in law.\n\n14.\nThe appellant in view

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

288 (Delhi) at para 20 which is as under: 11. The learned Counsel further submitted that for the Assessment Year 2013-14, assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide Order dated 23.03.2016 where the depreciation

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

288 (Delhi) at para 20 which is as under: 11. The learned Counsel further submitted that for the Assessment Year 2013-14, assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide Order dated 23.03.2016 where the depreciation

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

288 (Delhi) at para 20 which is as under: 11. The learned Counsel further submitted that for the Assessment Year 2013-14, assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide Order dated 23.03.2016 where the depreciation

M/S MHM HOLDINGS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-12 , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.M/S. Mhm Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Range - 12 Bengaluru No. 52, Bassappa Road Shantinagar Bengaluru 560027 Pan – Aabcm6614L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Parthasarathi, Adv. Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 23/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/11/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M.

depreciable assets, The book value in case of other assets. Net worth is deemed to be the cost of acquisition and cost of improvement for section 48 and section 49 of the Act. As per section 50B, no indexation benefit is available on cost of acquisition, i.e., net worth. Provisions of Sec.48 & 49 stand substituted by the provisions of Sec.50B

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SAINT GOBAIN CRYSTALS & DETECTORS (I) LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(3), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Saint Gobain Crystals & Detectors (I)Ltd Sy.No.171/2, Maruthi Indl.Estate Hoodi Rajapalya, Whitefield Main Road, Bangalore-48. … Respondent Pan:Aaacb 6794 R

288, certifying that the deduction has been correctly claimed in accordance with the provisions of this section. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, in computing the total income of the asses-see of the previous year relevant to the assessment year immediately succeeding the last of the relevant assess-ment years 5ending before

BOSCH LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member & Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan

288 giving such particulars in the report as may be prescribed. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, the expressions,— (i) “additional wages” means the wages paid to the new regular workmen in excess of [one hundred workmen] employed during the previous year: Provided that in the case of an existing [factory], the additional wages shall

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BOSCH LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed and revenue’s appeal for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

288 giving such particulars in the report as may be prescribed. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, the expressions,— (i) “additional wages” means the wages paid to the new regular workmen in excess of [one hundred workmen] employed during the previous year: Provided that in the case of an existing [factory], the additional wages shall

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S ATRIA HYDEL POWER LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, ITA Nos.534 to 556/Bang/2018 and CO Nos

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Years : 2010-11 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Atria Hydel Power Ltd., Ward - 1(1)(2), #1, Palace Road, Bengaluru. Bangalore-560 001. Pan : Aacca 3754 E Appellant Respondent

288 whereby sub- section (2) of sec. 115JB was substituted provides that the amendment is applicable w.e.f. 01.0.2013 i.e. for the assessment year 2013-14 onwards. The relevant extracts of the memorandum has been reproduced hereinabove in the submissions of the Learned AR. From the aforesaid amendments, it is clear that prior to amendment applicable from the assessment year

M/S ATRIA POWER CORPROATION LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2010-11

288 whereby sub-section (2) of sec. 115JB was substituted provides that the amendment is applicable w.e.f. 01.0.2013 i.e. for the assessment year 2013-14 onwards. The relevant extracts of the memorandum has been reproduced hereinabove in the submissions of the Learned AR. From the aforesaid amendments, it is clear that prior to amendment applicable from the assessment year