M/S. REGIONAL OILSEEDS GROWERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNION LIMITED,CHITRADURGA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on this issue\nstands dismissed

depreciation and claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Act.\nLater, a revised return was filed declaring a gross total income of Rs. 4,37,00,195/- and the total\nincome of Rs. 1,61,03,690/- after claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act.\nPage 4 of 23\nITA Nos. 1354 & 1355/Bang/2016\n3.\nOn December

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear: 2017-18

80P. The Apex court had categorically held that investments made by a banking concern are part of the business of banking. In the present case also the investments held by banks are treated only as part of the business of banking only but not as a Stock in Trade but as a Capital Asset. 8.4 Further, both the parties also

FARMERS AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD KOPPA,PERIAPATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MYSURU

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.4 The appellant society would like provide the following details which are extracted from the audited balance sheet of the society Own Funds Amount in ₹ Particulars F.Y. 2015-16 F.Y. 2017-18 Share Capital 2,28,82,490 2,87,44,485 Reserve Fund

FARMERS AGRICULTURE SOCIETY LTD KOPPACREDIT CO OPERATIVE,PERIAPATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), MYSURU

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.4 The appellant society would like provide the following details which are extracted from the audited balance sheet of the society Own Funds Amount in ₹ Particulars F.Y. 2015-16 F.Y. 2017-18 Share Capital 2,28,82,490 2,87,44,485 Reserve Fund

M/S KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as common grounds of law are raised by the assessee

depreciation aggregating to Rs. 76,857 should be deducted from the dividend and if it is so done, the total income would get reduced to Rs. 1,32,955. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim. When the matter was ultimately carried to this court, it took note of the opening words of the sub-section, viz., "where

M/S BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

depreciation amounting to Rs.41.578/- 5.The L.A.A. erred in not granting deduction on account u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) on provision towards gratuity amounting to Rs.1,10,000/-“. 2. Ground no.1 is general in nature and does not require any specific finding, as the assessee has not advanced any argument except on the merits of the case. 3. Ground no.2 regarding

M/S. NANDI HOSPITALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant

M/S. NANDI HOSPITALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant

M/S. NANDI HOSPITALITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

b). Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has threadbare considered this issue and drawn a distinction between the parameters for allowing deduction of employer’s share and employees’ share in the relevant funds. It has been held that the contribution by the employees to the relevant

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S CORPORATION BANK, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Abraham P George

80P" 32. The object of the substitution, as explained in para 5 of the CBDT Circular No. 464, dt. 18th July, 1986, was to give the separate deduction, viz., one in respect of rural advances and the 17 ITA Nos.1264 & 1352(B)/13 other for provision for bad and doubtful debts in general and also to extend the benefit

SRI PANATI VIDYANATH REDDY ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

80P however return is not filed within due date". Against this observation the assessee Nirmal Enviro Solutions P. Ltd. filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the writ petition has been dismissed by observing as under: - "7. The scope of an 'intimation' under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, extends to the making of adjustments

M/S. NIRMAL ENVIRO SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

80P however return is not filed within due date". Against this observation the assessee Nirmal Enviro Solutions P. Ltd. filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the writ petition has been dismissed by observing as under: - "7. The scope of an 'intimation' under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, extends to the making of adjustments

MASS FAB TECHNOLOGIES,BANGALORE vs. CIT(APPEALS), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

80P however return is not filed within due date". Against this observation the assessee filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the writ petition has been dismissed by observing as under: - ITA No.995 & 1079/Bang/2022 Itek Packz, Bangalore Page 18 of 20` "7. The scope of an 'intimation' under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, extends

ITEK PACKZ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

80P however return is not filed within due date". Against this observation the assessee filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the writ petition has been dismissed by observing as under: - ITA No.995 & 1079/Bang/2022 Itek Packz, Bangalore Page 18 of 20` "7. The scope of an 'intimation' under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, extends

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

b).... (baa) "profits of the business " means the profits of the business as computed under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" as reduced by... The above shows that a computation under the head 'Profits and Gains from Business or Profession is quite different from a phrase 'profits and gain" simplictor. (8) The Explanation to section 10AA introduced

M/S HASSAN CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETIES UNION LTD ,HASSAN vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, HASSAN

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2014-15

b) Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(e) of the Act. 2. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee is a co-operative society engaged in processing of milk and Hassan Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd., Hassan Page 2 of 8 manufacturing of dairy products such as butter, ghee, pedha

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

b).... (baa) "profits of the business " means the profits of the business as computed under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" as reduced by... The above shows that a computation under the head 'Profits and Gains from Business or Profession is quite different from a phrase 'profits and gain" simplictor. (8) The Explanation to section 10AA introduced

SUBRAMANYA KARTHIK,BHADRAVATHI vs. ITO, WARD- 1 & TPS, SHIMOGA

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

80P however return is not filed within due date". Against this observation the assessee 9 Shri Subramanya Karthik filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the writ petition has been dismissed by observing as under: - "7. The scope of an 'intimation' under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, extends to the making of adjustments based

WIPRO LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80P, Doddakannellii, Income-tax, Sarjapur Road, Circle-7(1)(2) Bangalore 560 035 Bangalore. PAN: AAACW 0387R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sandeep Huilgol, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihallli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 03.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member The appeal filed by the assessee