BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

38 results for “disallowance”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai314Ahmedabad91Delhi86Cochin62Kolkata45Bangalore38Chennai34Chandigarh29Hyderabad18Jaipur11Indore11Surat10Cuttack7Raipur7Lucknow5Pune4Karnataka2Rajkot1Patna1Nagpur1Agra1Panaji1Kerala1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 43B45Addition to Income25Section 143(3)24Disallowance22Section 80H20Deduction19Section 145A16Section 26315Section 4011Section 143(2)

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1) , MANGALURU

ITA 642/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu\Nand\Nshri Soundararajan K.\Nita Nos.642 To 645/Bang/2024\N Assessment Years : 2017-18 To\N2020-21\Nm/S. Bharat Beedi Works\Nprivate Limited,\Ngolden Jubilee Building,\Nbharath Bagh,\Nkadri Road,\Nmangaluru – 575 002.\Npan: Aaacb9001B\Nappellant\Nassessee By\Nrevenue By\N: Shri Chythanya .K, Sr.\Nadvocate\N: Shri E. Shridhar, Cit-Dr\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\Norder\Nper Bench\Nthese Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Orders Of\Nthe Ld.Cit(A) -2, Panaji Dated 30/01/2024 In Respect Of The A.Ys.2017-18,\N2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee For\Neach Of The Assessment Years Are Extracted Hereunder For The Sack Of\Nconvenience.\Npage 2 Of 74\Nita Nos.642 To 645/Bang/2024\N Assessment Year 2017-18:\N“1. The Impugned Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are Not\Njustified In Law & On The Facts & Circumstances Of The\Ncase.\N2. The Impugned Assessment Proceedings & The\Nimpugned Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Dated\N29.11.2021 Are Bad & Non-Est Since The Notice Under\Nsection 143(2) Dated 13.08.2018 Was Issued Without\Naffixing Any Signature Either Manually Or Digitally.\N3. Without Prejudice To The Above, Impugned Assessment\Nproceedings & The Impugned Assessment Order Under\Nsection 143(3) Dated 29.11.2021 Are Bad & Non-Est\Nbeing Based On The Notice Under Section 143(2) Dated\N13.08.2018 Which Is Vague, Without Of Application Of Mind\Nand Contrary To Section 143(2) & Applicable Board\Ncirculars & Instructions.\N4. As Regards Disallowance Under Section 14A U/S Rule\N8D(2)(Ii):\N4.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 145A read with ICDS II making\ncorresponding adjustment to the opening stock.\n14. As regards ad-hoc disallowance of labelling

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 14A10
TDS6

ASHRAF NAFISA ALTHAF,MOODUBIDRI MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, UDUPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 614/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sanketh S. Nayak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the profit and loss account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the present provisions of section 145A

SURENDRA LAXMANRAO VAIDYA,GADAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GADAG

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1952/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Surendra Laxmanrao Vaidya, Kariyamma Kallu Badavane, Near Hatalgeri Naka, Gadag. ….Appellant Pan Avupv2546H Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Gadag. ……Respondent.

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 10(37)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

145A of the I.T. Act. The first respondent - Income Tax Officer was, therefore, not justified in refusing to grant a certificate under section 197 of the I.T. Act to the petitioner for non- deduction of tax at source, inasmuch as, the petitioner is not liable to pay any tax under the head "income from other sources" on the interest paid

M/S WYZMINDZ SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(1)(4), BANGALORE

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

ITA 3417/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Mukesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(2)Section 145ASection 2Section 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the profit and loss account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the present provisions of section 145A

M/S. KLUBER LUBRICATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 765/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Karanjot Singh, Shri Devashish Jain & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234CSection 244A

145A of the Act cannot be adopted while determining the rate of tax in pursuance to First schedule of Finance (No. 2) Act 2019 based on turnover. However, we keep this issue open and are not inclined to adjudicate at this juncture whether to include or exclude the amount of excise duty from the amount of turnover on the issue

M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 205/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 It(Tp)A No.205/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Tejas Networks Limited The Assistant Commissioner Plot No.25, Jp Software Park Of Income-Tax, Circle – 1, Ltu V. Bangalore. Electronic City Phase-I Hosur Road, Bangalore – 560 100. Pan : Aabct1670M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.S.Annamalai, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022 Date Of Hearing : 19.05.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.01.2017 & 23.11.2017, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2012-2013 & 2013- 2014. We Shall First Adjudicate It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2012-2013. It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 (Asst.Year 2012-2013) 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Design, Development, Manufacture Of Telecommunication Equipments. For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, The Return

For Appellant: Sri.S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

145A of the Act provides that the valuation of inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession' shall be in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. 5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings 5.1. The learned AO has erred in initiating proceedings under section

M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 LTU, BANGALORE

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

ITA 764/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 It(Tp)A No.205/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Tejas Networks Limited The Assistant Commissioner Plot No.25, Jp Software Park Of Income-Tax, Circle – 1, Ltu V. Bangalore. Electronic City Phase-I Hosur Road, Bangalore – 560 100. Pan : Aabct1670M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.S.Annamalai, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022 Date Of Hearing : 19.05.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Final Assessment Orders Dated 31.01.2017 & 23.11.2017, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2012-2013 & 2013- 2014. We Shall First Adjudicate It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2012-2013. It(Tp)A No.764/Bang/2017 (Asst.Year 2012-2013) 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Design, Development, Manufacture Of Telecommunication Equipments. For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, The Return

For Appellant: Sri.S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

145A of the Act provides that the valuation of inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession' shall be in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. 5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings 5.1. The learned AO has erred in initiating proceedings under section

AMERICAN POWER CONVERSION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1111/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 1111/Bang/2012 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

disallowed such provision for stock obsolescence on the ground that there is no such deduction available under the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted that section 145A

MR.NANJUNDA RENUKA ARADHYA ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 397/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 194C(2)Section 206ASection 40Section 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the profit and loss account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the present provisions of section 145A

HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY ,HUBBALLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), HUBALLI

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

ITA 341/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 250Section 40

disallowed, though it was not charged to the P&L account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the provisions of section 145A

M/S IDS NEXT BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2119/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rampriyadas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 145ASection 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the profit and loss account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the present provisions of section 145A

M/S. ABB LIMITED(FORMERLY ASEA BROWN BOVERI LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 791/BANG/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranita No.790 & 791/Bang/2008 Assessment Year : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Abb Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ii Floor, East Wing, Income Tax (Ltu), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru. Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Pan : Aaaca 3834 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 80H

section 145A of the Act introduced w.e.f. 1.4.1999 9. The appellant craves to leave to add/alter/amend/and/or delete any of the grounds on or before the hearing of appeal. 29. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue arise under identical facts and circumstances as it prevailed in AY 2002-03 as was submitted by the parties before us. The reasons

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S. ABB LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 896/BANG/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranita No.790 & 791/Bang/2008 Assessment Year : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Abb Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ii Floor, East Wing, Income Tax (Ltu), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru. Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Pan : Aaaca 3834 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 80H

section 145A of the Act introduced w.e.f. 1.4.1999 9. The appellant craves to leave to add/alter/amend/and/or delete any of the grounds on or before the hearing of appeal. 29. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue arise under identical facts and circumstances as it prevailed in AY 2002-03 as was submitted by the parties before us. The reasons

M/S. ABB LIMITED(FORMERLY ASEA BROWN BOVERI LIMITED),BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 790/BANG/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranita No.790 & 791/Bang/2008 Assessment Year : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Abb Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ii Floor, East Wing, Income Tax (Ltu), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru. Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Pan : Aaaca 3834 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 80H

section 145A of the Act introduced w.e.f. 1.4.1999 9. The appellant craves to leave to add/alter/amend/and/or delete any of the grounds on or before the hearing of appeal. 29. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue arise under identical facts and circumstances as it prevailed in AY 2002-03 as was submitted by the parties before us. The reasons

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S. ABB LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 897/BANG/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranita No.790 & 791/Bang/2008 Assessment Year : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Abb Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ii Floor, East Wing, Income Tax (Ltu), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru. Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Pan : Aaaca 3834 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel
Section 2Section 80H

section 145A of the Act introduced w.e.f. 1.4.1999 9. The appellant craves to leave to add/alter/amend/and/or delete any of the grounds on or before the hearing of appeal. 29. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue arise under identical facts and circumstances as it prevailed in AY 2002-03 as was submitted by the parties before us. The reasons

SHRI. BORAIAH SHIVANANJAIAH,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 680/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Asst.Commissioner Of K. Janatha Colony, Income Tax, Bidadi Hobli, Vs. Circle - 3(2)(1) Ramnagara Dist., Bengaluru Bengaluru Pan – Anaps2762E Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Assessee by Sri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43ASection 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the profit and loss account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the present provisions of section 145A

M/S KEN CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed in ITA No

ITA 300/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 154Section 43B

disallowed the same. The Ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the same. 8. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has maintained the service tax account as a Balance sheet item, i.e, it did not route through the collection and payments of service tax through the profit & loss account. Hence the assessee has not claimed any deduction towards service tax liability

M/S KEN CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed in ITA No

ITA 301/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Section 154Section 43B

disallowed the same. The Ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the same. 8. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has maintained the service tax account as a Balance sheet item, i.e, it did not route through the collection and payments of service tax through the profit & loss account. Hence the assessee has not claimed any deduction towards service tax liability

TOTAL ENVIRONMENT BUILDING SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 352/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 43B

disallowed, though it was not charged to the P&L account and it attracts the provisions of section 43B of the Act and the provisions of section 145A

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BANGALORE

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

ITA 2835/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Dell International Services The Additional Commissioner India Private Limited Of Income-Tax (Ltu) V. Bangalore. Divyashree Greens, Sy.Nos.12/1, 12/2A & 13/1A,Challaghatta Village,Varthur Hobli Bengaluru – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.T.Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Praveen Karanth, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 30.11.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading In Computer Systems Including Support & Maintenance Services & Leasing Of Computers. For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 30.11.2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.22,31,24,760. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice U/S 143(2) Of The I.T.Act Was Issued On 2 It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017. M/S.Dell International Services India Private Limited. 11.09.2014. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That The International Transactions Entered By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprises (Aes) Had Exceeded The Prescribed Limit, Hence, The Matter Was Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Determine The Arm’S Length Price (Alp) Of The Said Transaction. The Tpo Passed Order U/S 92Ca Of The I.T.Act On 19.10.2016. In The Said Order, The Tpo Had Proposed Following Adjustments:-

For Appellant: Sri.T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Praveen Karanth, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 40Section 92CSection 92C(3)

Section 37(1) of the Act for the reason that the said expenditure was incurred for maintaining uniformity in the franchisee stores and the Assessee neither owns nor derives any enduring benefit on such expenditure. 37. The AO classified the expenditure as capital in nature for the reasons that (i) the Form 3CD filed for AY 2012-13 noted