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

44 of 53 restricted strictly to the amount quantified by DSIR and not beyond that. Any expenditure not approved or quantified by DSIR cannot qualify for weighted deduction. 54.5 The learned DR further contended that the assessee cannot automatically seek allowance of the unapproved expenditure under section 35(1)(i) or section 37(1) of the Act. According

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

section 32 of the Act from F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to\nA.Y. 2015-16 till the year under consideration in the following manner:\nΑ.Υ. Opening WDV Addition\nTotal assets Depreciation\nat 25% (Rs.)\nClosing WDV\n(Rs.)\nduring\nthe (Rs.)\nyear (Rs.)\n2015\n-16\n412,05,36,13\n2\n412,05,36,13\n2\n103

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

44,90,784 in respect of STPI unit which was not reduced from the export turnover while computing deduction of Rs.8,00,47,585 under section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO therefore excluded the aforesaid sum from the export turnover without excluding them from the total turnover. As a result, the deduction claimed u/s.10A

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

depreciation on intangible assets.\n20.\nThe relevant facts are that the assessee company entered 2\ndifferent business transferred agreement (BTA) with its holding company\nInfosys Ltd. The first BTA was entered as on 1st July 2014 i.e. during the\nF.Y. 2014-15 for transfer of Edge suit of product division for a\nconsideration of Rs. 421 crores. The second

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) – depreciable in metal in setting tank for nature water filtration TOTAL 1,44,84,394 12.5 The ld. A.R. stated

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) – depreciable in metal in setting tank for nature water filtration TOTAL 1,44,84,394 12.5 The ld. A.R. stated

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) – depreciable in metal in setting tank for nature water filtration TOTAL 1,44,84,394 12.5 The ld. A.R. stated

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) – depreciable in metal in setting tank for nature water filtration TOTAL 1,44,84,394 12.5 The ld. A.R. stated

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) – depreciable in metal in setting tank for nature water filtration TOTAL 1,44,84,394 12.5 The ld. A.R. stated

M/S. SAFINA HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojarim/S. Safina Hotels Pvt. Ltd., 84/85, Safina Plaza, Infantry Road, Bangalore-560 001 ….Appellant Pan Aaccs 5146G Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jcit(D.R)

44,324. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation by holding that no business was carried out. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee was carrying on the business. Therefore, there is no question of disallowance of depreciation. After hearing both sides, we find that the learned Commissioner of Income

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

44 (Bang-Trib) order dated IT(TP)A No.226/Bang/2021 Page 7 of 25 13.10.2017, took note of the decision of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Sysarris Software Pvt.Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2016) 67 Taxmann.com 243 (Bangalore-Trib) wherein the Tribunal after noticing the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chryscapital (supra

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

section 10AA deduction. Reliance in this regard is placed on: CIT v Socidade De Fomento Industrial Pvt Limited (No.1) i. (2020) 429 ITR 207 (Born) [CLC-III Pg.466-486] M/s. Syngene International Limited, Bangalore Page 13 of 29 CIT v Enable Exports (P.) Ltd. (2012) 17 taxmann.com ii. 182 (Del) [CLC-III Pg.487-489] ' 3.9 Turnover criterion: The turnover of EOU unit

M/S. JSW STEEL PROCESSING CENTRES LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(6), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

44,321/- after claiming additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act amounting to Rs.46,63,950/-. The assessment

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]

depreciation of goodwill back to the file of Assessing Officer with the directions to adjudicate the issue afresh after taking into consideration the additional evidences now filed by the Assessee. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and all the rights and contentions of both the sides have been left open

TEKTRONIX (INDIA) PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A 673/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2007 – 08

depreciation allowance of Rs.34,46,195/- claimed by the Appellant in the Return of Income ("Rol") for the AY 2007-08. Page 5 of 31 IT(TP)A 673/Bang/2017 A. Y : 2007 – 08 7. Other consequential grounds 7.1 The Learned AO has erred in law and on facts in determining the tax liability by making the aforementioned additions and computing

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

44 and the said purchase consideration based on the valuation of business, ought to be accepted as genuine. Goodwill arising on slump sale — eligible for depreciation 68. The ld. AR submitted that while the AO did not principally contend against the position of the Appellant, that the goodwill recorded by it is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section

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

44, 45 & 46, it has been noted as follows : "Depreciation is the exhaustion of the effective life of a fixed asset owing to 'use' or obsolescence. It may be computed as that part of the cost of the asset which will not be recovered when the asset is finally put out of use. The object of providing for depreciation

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

44, 45 & 46, it has been noted as follows : "Depreciation is the exhaustion of the effective life of a fixed asset owing to 'use' or obsolescence. It may be computed as that part of the cost of the asset which will not be recovered when the asset is finally put out of use. The object of providing for depreciation