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 and investment allowance, etc as the same are not actual expense and hence need to be excluded. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court has provided the interpretation of the wording "profits and gains" for the purpose of section 80HH. As the wording of section 1OAA is para materia to the wording in section 80HH, the ratio

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

391 1TR 1 (St) at page 214 state as follows:-\n\"Rationalisation of provisions of Section 10AA\nUnder the existing provisions of the section 10AA, deduction is allowed from the\ntotal income of an assessee, in respect of profits and gains from his Unit operating\nin SEZ. Subject to fulfillment of certain conditions. Section 10AA allows deduction\nin computing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. SRI. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

depreciation disallowed by the Assessing Officer under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') which was allowed by the CIT (Appeals) by following the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. The ld. DR has submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has admitted the SLP filed by the department in the case of Director

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE vs. M/S. SRI. LAKSHMI EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

depreciation disallowed by the Assessing Officer under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') which was allowed by the CIT (Appeals) by following the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. The ld. DR has submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has admitted the SLP filed by the department in the case of Director

M/S. TE CONNECTIVITY SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.300/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17

Depreciation is an expense that takes into account the estimated useful life of plant and equipment. Amortization works the same way but pertains to intangible assets such as goodwill, patents and copyrights. 22. He submitted that National Court Denmark in the case of Denmark vs Pharma Distributor A AIS, March 2020, Case No SKM2020.105.0LR has ruled that that amortization

M/S. MISTRAL SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 32(2) and consequently unabsorbed depreciation should also be set off against any income of a subsequent year under any head. Further, the restriction of eight years for carry forward and set off of business loss is not applicable to unabsorbed depreciation, thereby meaning that the unabsorbed depreciation is eligible for carry forward and set off for any number

M/S. MISTRAL SOFTWARE PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 32(2) and consequently unabsorbed depreciation should also be set off against any income of a subsequent year under any head. Further, the restriction of eight years for carry forward and set off of business loss is not applicable to unabsorbed depreciation, thereby meaning that the unabsorbed depreciation is eligible for carry forward and set off for any number

M/S. MISTRAL SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 32(2) and consequently unabsorbed depreciation should also be set off against any income of a subsequent year under any head. Further, the restriction of eight years for carry forward and set off of business loss is not applicable to unabsorbed depreciation, thereby meaning that the unabsorbed depreciation is eligible for carry forward and set off for any number

M/S. MISTRAL SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1)(2),, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 32(2) and consequently unabsorbed depreciation should also be set off against any income of a subsequent year under any head. Further, the restriction of eight years for carry forward and set off of business loss is not applicable to unabsorbed depreciation, thereby meaning that the unabsorbed depreciation is eligible for carry forward and set off for any number

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

depreciation could not be deducted on the capital expenditure incurred by the assessee. In reply, the learned counsel pointed out that the expenditure by way of technical know- how was capitalized and it was not claimed as revenue expenditure. Therefore, there was also no reason to disallow depreciation on such capitalized amount as the aforesaid provision does not deal with

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

depreciation could not be deducted on the capital expenditure incurred by the assessee. In reply, the learned counsel pointed out that the expenditure by way of technical know- how was capitalized and it was not claimed as revenue expenditure. Therefore, there was also no reason to disallow depreciation on such capitalized amount as the aforesaid provision does not deal with

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

depreciation and investment allowance, etc as the same are not actual expense and hence need to be excluded. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court has provided the interpretation of the wording "profits and gains" for the purpose of section 80HH. As the wording of section 1OAA is para materia to the wording in section 80HH, the ratio

NXP SEMICONDUCTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 391 of the Companies Act, it ceases to retain the character of contract and operates by force of the statute……” . For the above, the Hon‟ble High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of J.K. (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd vs. New Kaiser-I-Hind Spinning & Weaving Co. Ltd (1970) 40 Comp

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S TRISHUL DEVELOPERS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

391 read with Section 394 of the Companies Act. The\nSaraswati Industrial Syndicate, the trans free Company was a\nsubsidiary of the Indian Sugar Company, namely, the transferor\nCompany. Under the scheme of amalgamation, the Indian Sugar\nCompany stood dissolved on 29th October, 1962 and it ceased to\nbe in existence thereafter. Though the scheme provided that the\ntransferee Company

M/S. HIMALAYA WELLNESS COMPANY (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY),BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.259/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/S.Himalaya Wellness Company The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As The Himalaya Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bengaluru. Drug Company), Makali, Tumkur Road Bengaluru – 562 162. Pan : Aadft3025B. (Appellant) (Respondent)

391 Total 231,39,79,272 3. On receipt of TPO’s order, the A.O. passed draft assessment on 16.04.2021. The A.O., apart from incorporating the TP adjustment suggested by TPO, also made the following corporate tax additions in the draft assessment order. Disallowance on account of Amount (in Rs.) Depreciation i.e. Re-characterisation of 8,23,073 plant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS BPO LTD, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt.Beena Pillai

section 10A before setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation by Ld.CIT (A). Admittedly, it has been submitted that this issue stands settled in favour of assessee by decision of Hon’able Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Yokogawa India Ltd reported in (2017) 391

M/S. CANARA BANK (ERSTWHILE SYNDICATE BANK),BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 14 of 31 (iii) the method and rates adopted for calculating the depreciation, shall be the same as have been adopted for the purpose of preparing such accounts including profit and loss account and laid before the company at its annual general meeting in accordance with the provisions of section

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

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 14 of 31 (iii) the method and rates adopted for calculating the depreciation, shall be the same as have been adopted for the purpose of preparing such accounts including profit and loss account and laid before the company at its annual general meeting in accordance with the provisions of section