BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Abraham P Georgem/S.Brigade Enterprises Ltd., 29Th & 30Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Brigade Gateway Campus, 26/1, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore-560055. … Appellant Pan: Aaacb7459F Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-11, Bangalore. … Respondent

section 80-IB(10) of the Act in respect of residential units having built up area of 1500 sq. ft. or less in ‘Brigade Gateway’ and ‘Brigade Metropolis’ housing projects. We, therefore, dismiss grounds No.2 to 6 raised by revenue in this appeal. ” Since the issue before us is similar to the issue in the earlier assessment year

M/S. GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-3, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.2355/Bang/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd., Wing A, B & C, Helios Business Park, 150, Orr, Kadubeesanahalli, Bangalore-560103 ….Appellant Pan Aaccg 2435N Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range 3, Bangalore. ……Respondent.

disallowance could be computed under section 14 A by applying rule 8D. In support of his contentions he placed reliance on a recent ruling by Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs Chittinad Logistics Ltd reported in (2018) 18 Taxmann.com 221. It is also been submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed SLP filed by revenue

M/S. SYNGENE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 6, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2010-11

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"): M/s. Syngene International Limited, Bangalore Page 2 of 29 1.Disallowance of relief claimed under section 10B of the Act 1.1 The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law arid in fact in disallowing

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. (a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance

NADATHUR ESTATES PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BENGALURU

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. Since both the appeals have common and identical issue, they are heard together and disposed of by a consolidated order. 2. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No.267/Bang/2018 and the facts narrated therein. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

NADATHUR ESTATES PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BENGALURU

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. Since both the appeals have common and identical issue, they are heard together and disposed of by a consolidated order. 2. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No.267/Bang/2018 and the facts narrated therein. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

250 of the Act to the extent prejudicial to the appellant is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. Assessment order passed is barred by limitation 2.1. The impugned assessment order passed under section 143(3) dated 17.2.2020 is barred by limitation in accordance with section 153(1) read with clause (iv) of Explanation 1 as well

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

250 of the Act to the extent prejudicial to the appellant is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. Assessment order passed is barred by limitation 2.1. The impugned assessment order passed under section 143(3) dated 17.2.2020 is barred by limitation in accordance with section 153(1) read with clause (iv) of Explanation 1 as well

M/S. SLK SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-6N, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowances made under section 40(a)(i). However, the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the argument forwarded by the assessee proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee without assigning any reasoning. The relevant findings of the ld. CIT-A is reproduced as under: “5.3.3 The facts of the case, assessment order and submissions of the appellant have been considered

M/S. SLK SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-6, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowances made under section 40(a)(i). However, the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the argument forwarded by the assessee proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee without assigning any reasoning. The relevant findings of the ld. CIT-A is reproduced as under: “5.3.3 The facts of the case, assessment order and submissions of the appellant have been considered

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED ,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, , MYSORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

disallowances were made under section 40A(3) and section 40(a)(ia). 2. The appellant being aggrieved filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the order under section 250

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), MYSORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

disallowances were made under section 40A(3) and section 40(a)(ia). 2. The appellant being aggrieved filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the order under section 250