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

depreciation claimed on intangible assets. The grounds raised by the assessee on this issue are allowed. 37. Coming to issue raised through additional ground of appeal regarding allowances of foreign tax as business expenses under section 37 of the Act. ITA Nos.290 - 294/Bang/2025 Page 32 of 53 38. The relevant facts are that during the year under consideration, the assessee

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

42 of 58 acquisition of invaluable business and commercial rights, eligible for depreciation in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 64. The learned

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

depreciation whichever is lower should be considered on cumulative basis for the purpose of set off against book profits while computing tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act. Thus, the appeal was partly allowed by the CIT(A). 5. Being aggrieved by that part of the order of the CIT(A) granting relief to assessee-society, the revenue has preferred

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

depreciation whichever is lower should be considered on cumulative basis for the purpose of set off against book profits while computing tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act. Thus, the appeal was partly allowed by the CIT(A). 5. Being aggrieved by that part of the order of the CIT(A) granting relief to assessee-society, the revenue has preferred

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 by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act in respect of the payments made for purchase of software and capitalized by the assessee. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee made the payment of Rs.49,42

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

42 calculation or depreciation shall correspond to the method and rates which have been adopted for calculating the depreciation for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year." The further details of section

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

42 of 55 The details of such expenses are as under: Sl. Reasons for disallowance u/s Particulars of Expense Amount No. 35E(3) 1 Value of Mines 1,30,00,000 Section 35E(3)(i) – value of mines 2 Purchase of Hose 4,08,673 Section 35E(3)(iii) – depreciable

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

42 of 55 The details of such expenses are as under: Sl. Reasons for disallowance u/s Particulars of Expense Amount No. 35E(3) 1 Value of Mines 1,30,00,000 Section 35E(3)(i) – value of mines 2 Purchase of Hose 4,08,673 Section 35E(3)(iii) – depreciable

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

42 of 55 The details of such expenses are as under: Sl. Reasons for disallowance u/s Particulars of Expense Amount No. 35E(3) 1 Value of Mines 1,30,00,000 Section 35E(3)(i) – value of mines 2 Purchase of Hose 4,08,673 Section 35E(3)(iii) – depreciable

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

42 of 55 The details of such expenses are as under: Sl. Reasons for disallowance u/s Particulars of Expense Amount No. 35E(3) 1 Value of Mines 1,30,00,000 Section 35E(3)(i) – value of mines 2 Purchase of Hose 4,08,673 Section 35E(3)(iii) – depreciable

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

42 of 55 The details of such expenses are as under: Sl. Reasons for disallowance u/s Particulars of Expense Amount No. 35E(3) 1 Value of Mines 1,30,00,000 Section 35E(3)(i) – value of mines 2 Purchase of Hose 4,08,673 Section 35E(3)(iii) – depreciable

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

42. The Assessee’s turnover was around Rs.110 Crores. Therefore the action of the CIT(A) in directing TPO to exclude companies having turnover of more than Rs.200 crores as not comparable with the Assessee was justified. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the Assessee, there are two views expressed by two Hon’ble High Courts

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 by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act in respect of the payments made for purchase of software and capitalized by the assessee. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee made the payment of Rs.49,42

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. 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

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. 5 Addition under section 14A of the Act 5.1 The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making an addition under section 14A of the Act by applying Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") 5.2 The Learned CIT(A) has erred

UNITED BREWERIES LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ADDL..C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

42. Thus, the fact that we have held that sub-sections (2) & (3) of section 14A and Rule 8D would operate prospectively (and, not retrospectively) does not mean that the assessing officer is not to satisfy himself with the correctness of the claim of the assessee with regard to such expenditure. If he is satisfied that the assessee has correctly

M/S SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised\ngrounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed for the years under consideration

42 wherein Hon'ble Court in para 100\nheld as under:\n“100. Also, any ruling on the more expansive language\ncontained in the explanations to Section 9(1)(vi) of the\nIncome Tax Act would have to be ignored if it is wider and\nless beneficial to the assessee than the definition\ncontained in the DTAA, as per section

M/S CESSNA GARDEN DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11

depreciation allowance on buildings under section 32 of the Act and deduction under section 80 IAB in respect of rental income derived from development of a SEZ (provided there are profits) Even though 30% of net annual value under section 24(b) amounting to Rs. 12,83,42