BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(2), , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 14A can be invoked and disallowance of expenditure can be made, there are three decisions of the different High Courts directly on ITA Nos.528 to 530/Bang/2018 Page 17 of 22 the issue and against the appellant-Revenue. No contrary decision of a High Court has been shown to us. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income

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

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 92CA read with section 154 of the Act.” IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru Page 42 of 62 8.1 These grounds are infructuous and dismissed accordingly. 9. Next ground Nos. 8 & 9 in AY in 2014-15 are with regard to payment towards technical service fee to it’s A.E. which

M/S PRAXAIR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 92CA read with section 154 of the Act.” IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru Page 42 of 62 8.1 These grounds are infructuous and dismissed accordingly. 9. Next ground Nos. 8 & 9 in AY in 2014-15 are with regard to payment towards technical service fee to it’s A.E. which

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 40(a)(ia) of the Act:  The Learned AO and the Hon'ble DRP has erred in disallowing an amount of Rs. 204

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowed by processing the return under section 143 (1). Before the learned CIT – A there was no response and therefore he upheld the above adjustment under section 143 (1) of the act. 11. Therefore, against this appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 12. The learned authorized representative submitted that that the learned central processing Centre

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowed by processing the return under section 143 (1). Before the learned CIT – A there was no response and therefore he upheld the above adjustment under section 143 (1) of the act. 11. Therefore, against this appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 12. The learned authorized representative submitted that that the learned central processing Centre

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

disallowance under section 14A cannot be made: (a) CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 204 (Punj

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

disallowance under section 14A of the Act when no dividend income had been earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year ? The court referred to the decision of this court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the Income-tax ITA Nos.581, 596, 622, 636/Bang/2017 Page 22 of 38 Appellate Tribunal

M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

disallowance under section 14A of the Act when no dividend income had been earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year ? The court referred to the decision of this court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the Income-tax ITA Nos.581, 596, 622, 636/Bang/2017 Page 22 of 38 Appellate Tribunal

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

disallowance under section 14A of the Act when no dividend income had been earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year ? The court referred to the decision of this court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the Income-tax ITA Nos.581, 596, 622, 636/Bang/2017 Page 22 of 38 Appellate Tribunal

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, appealsof the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavand Shri. Jason P Boaz

disallowance under section 14A of the Act when no dividend income had been earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year ? The court referred to the decision of this court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the Income-tax ITA Nos.581, 596, 622, 636/Bang/2017 Page 22 of 38 Appellate Tribunal

M/S. PRAXAIR INDIA PVT. LTD,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S

204/- on the payment of royalty to the Associated Enterprises (AE) by restricting to 1% against 4% as done by the assessee ii. TP adjustment of Rs.33,98,48,953 with respect to the payment of interest on CCDs by re-characterizing the same to be External Commercial Borrowing (ECB) iii. Disallowance of Rs.9,27,82,000/- under section

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

disallowed for Assessment Year 2008-09. It was submitted that under the License Agreement with RCT, the assessee obtained a insulin in bulk form using the strain. It was also submitted that no other facility of manufacturing / producing the human insulin prior to setting up of the said unit and this unit has been also evaluating the feasibility of using

M/S. BIG BAGS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,DAKSHINA KANNADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed the interest on delayed payments. Further it was also noted that a sum of Rs.70,06,204 includes interest on delayed payment of taxes, VAT write off pertaining to prior period. Hence these are not allowable in the current year as per section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all the COs by assessee in CO\nNos

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, which was\nnot the reason for assessment at all as such, reopening therefore is\nnot sustainable. He relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways 331 ITR 230.\nHowever, we find that there is a binding decision of jurisdictional\nHigh Court in the case

MANIPAL EDUCATION AND MEDICAL GROUP INDIA PVT. LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of ₹ 2,412,478 was made. Consequently, the assessment order under section 143 (3) read with section 143 (3A) and 143 (3B) of the act ITA Nos.719 to 721 & 976/Bang/2025 Page 21 of 26 was passed and the total income of the assessee was determined at loss of Rs. 204

MANIPAL GLOBAL EDUCATION SERVICES PVT LTD., ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of ₹ 2,412,478 was made. Consequently, the assessment order under section 143 (3) read with section 143 (3A) and 143 (3B) of the act ITA Nos.719 to 721 & 976/Bang/2025 Page 21 of 26 was passed and the total income of the assessee was determined at loss of Rs. 204

MANIPAL EDUCATION AND MEDICAL GROUP INDIA PVT. LTD. ,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance of ₹ 2,412,478 was made. Consequently, the assessment order under section 143 (3) read with section 143 (3A) and 143 (3B) of the act ITA Nos.719 to 721 & 976/Bang/2025 Page 21 of 26 was passed and the total income of the assessee was determined at loss of Rs. 204