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) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

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) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

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) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S. LTIMINDTREE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO M/S. MINDTREE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3),, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 32 of the I.T.Act, the depreciation shall be allowed when the assets are owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business or profession. The assessee was specifically asked to produce the evidence in respect of the ownership of assets. The assessee’s AR expressed his difficulty to furnish the evidence with regard to the ownership

M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

928 of the Act and therefore no adjustment was warranted under chapter X of the Act. ix) ignoring the fact that the TPO adopted the notional interest receivable at a rate as high as 14% p.a, which is totally arbitrary, to quantify an adjustment to the arms length price, towards interest receivable. x) ignoring that the TPO adopted notional interest

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

928. The assessee pointed out that it had an opening cash and bank balance of Rs 392,76,31,695 and a closing balance of Rs 251,53,33,253. The reduction was thus a sum of Rs.141,22,98,442. The assessee had share capital and reserves in excess of Rs.1000 crores and gave the following details in this

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

928. The assessee pointed out that it had an opening cash and bank balance of Rs 392,76,31,695 and a closing balance of Rs 251,53,33,253. The reduction was thus a sum of Rs.141,22,98,442. The assessee had share capital and reserves in excess of Rs.1000 crores and gave the following details in this

JUPITER CAPITAL P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

928. The assessee pointed out that it had an opening cash and bank balance of Rs 392,76,31,695 and a closing balance of Rs 251,53,33,253. The reduction was thus a sum of Rs.141,22,98,442. The assessee had share capital and reserves in excess of Rs.1000 crores and gave the following details in this

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTORS (P) LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 92A(2u) which provides a limit of 26% of the equity capital carrying voting rights for treating an enterprise as Associated Enterprise. If the limit is reduced further it would only result in eliminating more and more companies on the other hand if the (limit is relaxed then companies with predominantly related party transactions would get included which would

M/S WAY 2 WEALTH BROKERS (P) LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri. Inturi Rama Rao

928/-. The return was processed u/s.143(1) on 08.09.2008. Subsequently, the return was selected for scrutiny. Notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee company. The assessee company is engaged in the business of Stock broking & financial intermediary. During the course of assessment proceedings, various details as to financial statements, profit & loss a/c, balance ITA.758

M/S. CORPORATION BANK,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1), MANGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

section 115JB(2) of the I.T.Act since it is not a provision towards diminution in the value of assets. This provision is reduced from the Gross Advances while preparing the Balance Sheet. Therefore, it has to be treated as write off and not as provision for diminution 7 ITA Nos.1108/Bang/2019 & 170/PAN/2019. M/s Union Bank of India. in value of asset

M/S.NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , , MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

928/ 1991 before the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court which held as under : "More than the AO’s report which the learned judge characterized as evasive and speculative, it is the statement of reasons for the reopening which is evasive and speculative. We find no basis therein which could have led the appellant to entertain reasons to believe

M/S NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

928/ 1991 before the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court which held as under : "More than the AO’s report which the learned judge characterized as evasive and speculative, it is the statement of reasons for the reopening which is evasive and speculative. We find no basis therein which could have led the appellant to entertain reasons to believe

M/S. TIMKEN ENGINEERING & RESEARCH INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 234C of the Act of INR 64,731. [corresponding to ground 19] 23. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify thegrounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing ofthis Appeal. [corresponding to ground20] ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL Transfer Pricing Related: 24. The learned AO / TPO erred

TIMKEN ENGINEERING & RESEARCH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 234C of the Act of INR 64,731. [corresponding to ground 19] 23. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify thegrounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing ofthis Appeal. [corresponding to ground20] ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL Transfer Pricing Related: 24. The learned AO / TPO erred

DCIT vs. M/S TIMKEN ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 234C of the Act of INR 64,731. [corresponding to ground 19] 23. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify thegrounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing ofthis Appeal. [corresponding to ground20] ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL Transfer Pricing Related: 24. The learned AO / TPO erred

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TIMKEN ENGINEERING & RESEARCH INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 234C of the Act of INR 64,731. [corresponding to ground 19] 23. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify thegrounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing ofthis Appeal. [corresponding to ground20] ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL Transfer Pricing Related: 24. The learned AO / TPO erred

M/S TIMKEN ENGINEERING & RESEARCH INDIA P. LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

section 234C of the Act of INR 64,731. [corresponding to ground 19] 23. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify thegrounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing ofthis Appeal. [corresponding to ground20] ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL Transfer Pricing Related: 24. The learned AO / TPO erred