RAAJRATNA ENERGY HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

section 56(2)(viib) of the\nAct for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Further for the Assessment Year 2018-\n19, AO has disallowed short term capital loss of Rs.5,10,000/- as per his Order\nat para No.5 on sale of investment in Venu Hydro Powers Ltd., and observed\nthat the assessee has claimed excess long term capital loss

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-1(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80IA of the Act in the return of income. However, the AO wrongly disallowed the same again in the assessment order and added to the total income which amount to double taxation of the same amount. 11. The learned CIT(A) regarding disallowance of part of income under the head non-aeronautical found that identical disallowances made

KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above and the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowance made under section 14A of the Act and the finding is given in para 6.22 of the same Tribunal order, copy available on page 116

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above and the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowance made under section 14A of the Act and the finding is given in para 6.22 of the same Tribunal order, copy available on page 116

M/S TOTAL ENVIRONMENT BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed the interest expenses incurred by the assessee on account of late deposit of service tax and TDS after having reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT (1998) (supra). The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under :— FACTS During the year under consideration, the assessee failed

TOTAL ENVIRONMENT BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed the interest expenses incurred by the assessee on account of late deposit of service tax and TDS after having reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT (1998) (supra). The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under :— FACTS During the year under consideration, the assessee failed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S TOTAL ENVIRONMENT BUILDING SYSTEMS PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed the interest expenses incurred by the assessee on account of late deposit of service tax and TDS after having reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT (1998) (supra). The relevant extract of the judgment reads as under :— FACTS During the year under consideration, the assessee failed

M/S NADATHUR ESTATES PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member Ita Nos.3247 & 3248(Bang)/2018 (Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2009-10) M/S Nadathur Estates Pvt.Ltd. Plot No.23, 3Rd Floor, Nadathur Palace, 8H Main Rod, Jayanagar, 3Rd Block, Bangalore-560 011 Panno.Aabcn0228P Appellant Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -5(1)(1), Bangalore Respondent

116 consists of entire list of investment including company where assessee invested in share application. 5. Ld.Counsel, at the outset, submitted that for purposes of computing disallowance under section

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

disallowing an amount of Rs 2,03,335 under section 14A of the Act without appreciating that the investments were made in subsidiary company in the past years and that there was no fresh investments made during the year and that the Appellant had not incurred any expenditure for earning the dividend income from the investments

RAAJRATNA ENERGY HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

Accordingly, this\nground is allowed for statistical purposes

section 56(2)(viib) of the\nAct for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Further for the Assessment Year 2018-\n19, AO has disallowed short term capital loss of Rs.5,10,000/- as per his Order\nat para No.5 on sale of investment in Venu Hydro Powers Ltd., and observed\nthat the assessee has claimed excess long term capital loss

M/S. INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed partly

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 9Th Floor Prestige Of Income-Tax Thirulakshmi Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) No.11 M.G. Road Bengaluru Bengaluru 560 001 Pan No : Aabcs6967N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Respondent By : D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai: Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16/10/2017 Passed By The Ld.Dcit Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(13) For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another.

section 32 of the Act. The Learned AO and the Hon’ble DRP has erred in limiting the allowance for depreciation on purchase of software to 25% of the cost as against the depreciation rate of 60% permitted under the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (Rules).  The Learned AO and the Hon'ble DRP has failed to appreciate that the software

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BIOCON LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

disallowed the unrealised foreign exchange loss amounting to Rs.22,95,48,325/- by relying of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Woodward Governor India vs CIT reported in 179 taxman 362 and Circular no.3 of 2010 dated 23/03/2010. The Ld.AO also relied on following decisions  Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Joseph John

BIOCON LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

disallowed the unrealised foreign exchange loss amounting to Rs.22,95,48,325/- by relying of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Woodward Governor India vs CIT reported in 179 taxman 362 and Circular no.3 of 2010 dated 23/03/2010. The Ld.AO also relied on following decisions  Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Joseph John

DCIT vs. M/S CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,,

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

Disallowance under Section 14A : Rs.1,93,730. (ii) Addition under Section 41(1) : Rs.38,07,116. (iii) Income from Shantiniketan

M/S CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

Disallowance under Section 14A : Rs.1,93,730. (ii) Addition under Section 41(1) : Rs.38,07,116. (iii) Income from Shantiniketan

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act amounting to Rs. 14,82,695/- . The brief facts of the case are that on the perusal of the balance sheet, the Assessing Officer noted the assessee had made advances to its sister concern and others totaling Rs. 2,31,23,236/- . The learned AR for the assessee was asked

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES P. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

disallowance made by the learned assessing officer without giving an opportunity to the learned assessing officer to verify the same. 113. The learned authorized representative vehemently submitted that CIT – A has considered the submission of the taxpayer before the learned assessing officer and on verification of the same detail deleted the addition following is on order in assessee

HEWLETT PAKCARD INDIA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed and Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2010-11

disallowance made by the learned assessing officer without giving an opportunity to the learned assessing officer to verify the same. 113. The learned authorized representative vehemently submitted that CIT – A has considered the submission of the taxpayer before the learned assessing officer and on verification of the same detail deleted the addition following is on order in assessee