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

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.

disallowance under Section 14A can be made\ntowards the interest expenditure where the Appellant's\ninterest-free funds exceed its interest-free investments.\nFor the above Grounds and for such other Grounds which\nmay be allowed by the Honourable Members to be urged\nat the time of hearing, it is prayed that the aforesaid\nappeal be allowed.”\n Assessment Year

M/S. BHARAT BEEDI WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, MANGALURU

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

disallowance under Section 14A can be made\ntowards the interest expenditure where the Appellant's\ninterest-free funds exceed its interest-free investments.\n\nFor the above Grounds and for such other Grounds which\nmay be allowed by the Honourable Members to be urged\nat the time of hearing, it is prayed that the aforesaid\nappeal be allowed.\"\n\nPage

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue as well as\nCos of the Assessee for the Asst

Disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961.\n\n13.1 The ld. A.R. submitted that the interest income from\ninvestments in various co-operative societies and banks are entitled\nfor deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The details of the interest\nfrom investments in Co-operative Banks are as follows:\n\nParticulars

M/S INFOSYS LTD ,BANGALOR E vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 80JJAA being disallowed. 17.1. The Ld.AR submitted that copy of the Audit report under section 80JJAA, being Form No. 10DA was submitted to the Ld.AO vide submission dated 28.5.2014. The Ld.AO thereafter called upon assessee to justify the allowability of deduction under section 80JJAA. The assessee explained in detail as to why deduction under section 80JJAA should be allowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 80JJAA being disallowed. 17.1. The Ld.AR submitted that copy of the Audit report under section 80JJAA, being Form No. 10DA was submitted to the Ld.AO vide submission dated 28.5.2014. The Ld.AO thereafter called upon assessee to justify the allowability of deduction under section 80JJAA. The assessee explained in detail as to why deduction under section 80JJAA should be allowed

THE BELTHANGADY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SANGHA LIMITED,BELTHANGADY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , PUTTUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed\nfor statistical purposes

251 ITR 194 vide order dated 22 August 2001 has\ndirected to allow deduction of the same under the provisions of section\n80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The relevant extract of the judgement is\nreproduced as under:\nITA No.1927 & 1943/Bang/2024\nPage 11 of 16\nThere is no doubt, and it is not disputed, that the assessee-co-operative

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

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

disallowance u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act as the interest income has been earned from investment in FDs with Co-operative banks/other banks. Further, the ld. DR relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Division Bench in the case of Pr. CIT Hubballi Vs. Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd, Sirsi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INFOSYS LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

disallowance of foreign tax credit of Rs. 218,16,32,251 including Rs. 52,10,92,957 on account of foreign tax credit in respect of taxes presently under dispute with Australian tax authorities (ATO)) in respect of income on which deduction under section 10AA has been claimed. 4.2 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that foreign

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13.1 The ld. A.R. submitted that the interest income from investments in various co-operative societies and banks are entitled for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The details of the interest from investments in Co-operative Banks are as follows: Interest

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, UDUPI, UUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UDUPI

disallowance. Therefore, we allow this ground of\ncross objection of the assessee.\n10.4.8 Accordingly, we set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC\non this issue and remit this issue to the file of AO to recompute the\ncorrect business profit & Gross Total Income after taking into\nconsideration the interest Income accrued to the assessee &\nthereafter determine the correct

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, UDUPI vs. KAMBADAKONE RYTARA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD, UPPUNDA

disallowance. Therefore, we allow this ground of\ncross objection of the assessee.\n10.4.8\nAccordingly, we set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC\non this issue and remit this issue to the file of AO to recompute the\ncorrect business profit & Gross Total Income after taking into\nconsideration the interest Income accrued to the assessee &\nthereafter determine the correct

NAGINI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance made by the AO by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is not correct. 12. The subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in 395 ITR 611, the question arose for the consideration of the Hon’ble High Court is that whether the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s. 80P(2

NAGINI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance made by the AO by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is not correct. 12. The subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in 395 ITR 611, the question arose for the consideration of the Hon’ble High Court is that whether the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s. 80P(2

NAGINI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance made by the AO by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is not correct. 12. The subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in 395 ITR 611, the question arose for the consideration of the Hon’ble High Court is that whether the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s. 80P(2

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the\nappeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed\Nand\Nshri Keshav Dubey\N\N\Nita No. 881/Bang/2023\N Assessment Year: 2019-20\N\Ninfosys Limited\Nplot 44, Konappana Agrahara\Nhosur Road, Konappana\Nbangalore - 560100\Nkarnataka\N\Npan: Aaaci4798L\N\Nappellant\N\Nvs.\N\Ndy. Commissioner Of Income Tax\Ncircle - 3(1)(1)\Nbmtc Building, 80 Feet Road\Nkoramangala, Bangalore – 560095\Nkarnataka\N\Nrespondent\N\Nita No. 245/Bang/2024\N Assessment Year: 2019-20\N\Njt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd)\Ncircle - 3(1)(1)\Nroom No. 241, 2Nd Floor\Nbmtc Building, 80 Feet Road\N6Th Block, Koramangala\Nbangalore - 560095\Nkarnataka\N\Nvs.\N\Ninfosys Limited\Nplot 44, Konappana Agrahara\Nhosur Road, Konappana\Nbangalore - 560100\Nkarnataka\N\Npan: Aaaci4798L\N\Nappellant\N\Nrespondent\N\Nassessee By\Ndepartment By\N\Nsri Padam Chand Khincha – Ca\Nsmt. Srinandini Das – Cit - Dr\N\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N\N09.05.2025\N06.08.2025\N\Norder\N\Nper Keshav Dubey:\N\Nthese Cross Appeals Are Filed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short \"Ld.\Ncit(A)/Nfac] Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1056786183(1) Dated 05.10.2023 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax\Nact, 1961 (In Short “The Act\") For The A.Y.2019-20.\N\Npage 2 Of 34\N\N2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - \N\N\"1.\N\Ngeneral Ground\N\N1.

251/- (including Rs.52,10,92,957/- on\n\nPage 19 of 34\n\naccount of foreign tax credit in respect of taxes presently under dispute with\nAustralian Tax Authorities) in respect of income on which the deduction\nunder section 10AA of the Act has been claimed.\n\n11.1 The AO disallowed the foreign tax credit related to incomes\neligible

THE BELTHANGADY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SANGHA LIMITED,BELTHANGADY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , PUTTUR

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

disallowed the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(1) of Rs. 31,04,741.00 therefore, the only difference of Rs. 8,79,846 was added to the total income of the assessee as income from other sources. 14. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purpose, the relevant portion

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 251 of the Act. Concise grounds in AY 2017-18: Commission and Director sitting fee paid to Mr Vijay Mallya: 3. The Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Commission payment made to Mr Vijay Mallya, treating it as excessive without appreciating that the payments were made after compliance to the provisions of Law and erred

UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 251 of the Act. Concise grounds in AY 2017-18: Commission and Director sitting fee paid to Mr Vijay Mallya: 3. The Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Commission payment made to Mr Vijay Mallya, treating it as excessive without appreciating that the payments were made after compliance to the provisions of Law and erred