M/S. TELEFONICA DE ESPANA SA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE- 2(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos. 2657/Bang/2019, 180/Bang/2021 & 817/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2012-13 M/S. Telefonica Depreciation Espana Sa, C/O. Bsr & Co.Llp, 3Rd Floor, Pebble The Acit(It)/Dcit(It), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aahct0411G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr

Depreciation Espana SA, C/o. BSR & Co.LLP, 3rd Floor, Pebble The ACIT(IT)/DCIT(IT), Beach, Circle – 2(2), Embassy Golf Links Bangalore. Business Park, Vs. Off Intermediate Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 071. PAN: AAHCT0411G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Sharath Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25-07-2023 Date of Pronouncement

M/S HONEYWELL TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LAB PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

section 9 (1)(vi) of the Act as well as Article 12 of the India-Sweden DTAA" IBM Singapore Pte Ltd (3229/Bang/2018) Copy enclosed as Item 4 of Legal paperbook - In the present case, it was held that "Accordingly, as per the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence

ASST.C.I.T., BELLARY vs. M/S HOTHUR TRADERS 100% EOU, BELLARY

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for asst

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazita No.32/Bang/2016 (Asst. Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Bellary. . Appellant Vs. M/S Hothur Traders 100% Eou, No.85,6,7&8, Infantry Road, Cantonment, Bellary. . Respondent Pan –Aaefh7705H. Co No.55/Bang/2016 (By Assessee) Appellant By : Shri Nagendra Prasad, Cit Respondent By : Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 22-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-01-2018

9 and 9A of section 10B of the Act do not exist from 1.4.2004 and therefore the conclusion of the Assessing Officer that deduction under section 10B of the Act cannot be granted on the merger of firms is not correct. 6.4.3 It is a settled principle, upheld by various judicial decisions, that deduction under section

M/S HONEYWELL TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LAB PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranm/S Honeywell Technolgoy Solutions Jt. Cit, Special Range 3 Pvt. Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Bmtc Building Survey No. 96 & 97, Boganahalli 6Th Block, Koramangala Village & Survey No. 72/2 & 72/5 Vs. Bengaluru 560095 Doddakananahalli Village Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru 560103 Pan – Aaach4151J Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Smt. Shreya Loyalaka, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2022

9 M/s Honeywell Technolgoy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. of Rs.1.60 crores, the assesseee admitted that their life is more than two years. Accordingly, with respect to the amount of Rs.1.60 crores, the Ld CIT(A) upheld its capitalisation and directed the AO allow depreciation @ 60% /30% depending upon the period of usage in this year. In respect of the amount

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 allowance for Previous year at the prescribed dates. It is proposed to restrict the aggregate deduction in a year to the deduction computed at the prescribed rates and apportion the allowance in the ratio of number of days for which the assets were used by them. 9. Thus, it is evident that 5th proviso to section

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 allowance for Previous year at the prescribed dates. It is proposed to restrict the aggregate deduction in a year to the deduction computed at the prescribed rates and apportion the allowance in the ratio of number of days for which the assets were used by them. 9. Thus, it is evident that 5th proviso to section

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 allowance for Previous year at the prescribed dates. It is proposed to restrict the aggregate deduction in a year to the deduction computed at the prescribed rates and apportion the allowance in the ratio of number of days for which the assets were used by them. 9. Thus, it is evident that 5th proviso to section

COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

9 of 17  It is submitted that the order passed by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of VSL, affirming the order passed under Section 201 of the Act is now reversed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Vodafone Idea Limited v. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Intl Taxn) (reported in [2023] 152 taxmann.com 575 (Karnataka

M/S COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

9 of 17  It is submitted that the order passed by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of VSL, affirming the order passed under Section 201 of the Act is now reversed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Vodafone Idea Limited v. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Intl Taxn) (reported in [2023] 152 taxmann.com 575 (Karnataka

M/S. COMMUNICATIONS GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES LIMITED,UNITED KINGDOM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE- 2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappeal No. Appellant Respondent It(It)A M/S. Communications Global The Deputy Commissioner Of No.89/Bang/2019 Network Services Limited, Income Tax 81, Newgate Street, London, (International Taxation), Assessment Year : Ec1A 7Aj, Circle – 2(1), 2009-10 United Kingdom. Bengaluru. Pan : Aagcc 9220 K It(It)A The Deputy Commissioner Of Nos.2218/Bang/2019, Income Tax 32/Bang/2021, -Do (International Taxation), 709/Bang/2022, Circle – 2(2), 165 To 167/Bang/2023 Bengaluru. Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16 Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Aseem Sharma, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023

9 of 17  It is submitted that the order passed by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of VSL, affirming the order passed under Section 201 of the Act is now reversed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Vodafone Idea Limited v. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Intl Taxn) (reported in [2023] 152 taxmann.com 575 (Karnataka

M/S HONEYWELL TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LAB PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-3 , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13

section 37(1) of the Act while computing the total income. The Appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves to leave or add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.” Page 6 of 42 3. The brief facts of the case are that

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

9. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. We notice that the coordinate bench of Tribunal has held in the case of DCIT Vs. Sangeeta Mobiles Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.715/Bang/2017 dated 15.6.2018) that the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act cannot be invoked for making disallowance of depreciation

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

depreciation. Since the software was capitalized, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(i)/(ia) was not sustainable. The argument that payments were for royalty was rejected, and the assessee's appeal on this ground was allowed.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "40(a)(i)/(ia)", "32", "9

M/S VIDAL HEALTH INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , BANGALORE

In the result appeals for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. O.P. Meena

9(1)(vi) of A.Y: 2011 – 12 to 2014 – 15 the Act, and is liable to deduct TDS under section 194J of the Act. We therefore are in agreement with the view taken by Ld.CIT (A). Admittedly, assessee has not deducted TDS on payments made towards toll-free charges, and therefore, disallowance under section 40 (a) (ia) is warranted. However

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA -BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, 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

depreciation claimed\nby the assessee u/s.40(a)(i)/(ia) of the act by holding that, the\npayment made was towards the 'use of copyright' and therefore,\nis taxable as royalty under section 9

GLOBE TELESERVICES LIMITED,HONG KONG vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for both\nthe years under consideration stands partly allowed

section 9(1)(vi) for the IUC charges in great\ndetail:-\nVodafone Idea Limited (Earlier Known as `Vodafone South\nLimited') Which Now Stands Merged With 'Idea Cellular Ltd'.) ITA\nNo.160/2015 to 164/2015 and 64/2020 to 66/2020.\n[Karnataka High Court]\nHCG Global Communications Ltd. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 633\n[Bangalore — ITAT] [Entity based in Hong-Kong]\nOrange (formerly known

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R &D INSTITUTE INDIA- BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA-BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9

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

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

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9