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

256/-. The return was selected for scrutiny and the order of assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.12.2011 wherein the assessee’s income was determined at Rs.73,61,05,940/-, which, inter alia, included disallowances

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

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance is called for. Accordingly, Grounds No.7 to 7.3 in ITA No.1044/Del/2014 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 are allowed.” 47. We notice that the co-ordinate benches are consistently holding the view that the expenditure incurred on sponsoring of sports events are intended to promote business only and hence the same is allowable as expenditure. The allowability of brand promotion

M/S. UNITED SPIRITS LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 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 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) 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 Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

disallowance is called for. Accordingly, Grounds No.7 to 7.3 in ITA No.1044/Del/2014 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 are allowed.” 47. We notice that the co-ordinate benches are consistently holding the view that the expenditure incurred on sponsoring of sports events are intended to promote business only and hence the same is allowable as expenditure. The allowability of brand promotion

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 36(1)(iii) of the Act and therefore uphold his decision in the matter. Accordingly Grounds no.14 & 15 of Revenue’s appeal are dismissed.” The CIT(A) has only followed the decision of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment year 2009-10. Respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate bench to which

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

disallowed Rs.48,000/- and Rs.3,81,256/- respectively for both the\n Assessment Years. Assessee's submissions were not accepted by the AO and\nthe AO has applied section

M/S TEXPORT CREATION,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Section 234C of IT Act when the aforesaid disallowance is not legally sustainable. For the above grounds and for such other grounds which may be allowed by the Honourable members to be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the aforesaid appeal be allowed.” 3. At the very outset, it was submitted by ld. AR of assessee

M/S. ONMOBILE GLOBAL LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 5(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

Disallowance of TDS credit - Grounds 24 to 24.2 42. The ld. AR submitted that in the return of income, the Assessee had claimed TDS credit of Rs. 13,08,86,668/-. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessee claimed additional credit of Rs. 24,37,979/- pursuant to additional certificates being received post filing of the return

M/S ONMOBILE GLOBAL LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

Disallowance of TDS credit - Grounds 24 to 24.2 42. The ld. AR submitted that in the return of income, the Assessee had claimed TDS credit of Rs. 13,08,86,668/-. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessee claimed additional credit of Rs. 24,37,979/- pursuant to additional certificates being received post filing of the return

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

disallowed the sales promotion and advertisement expenses totally amounting to Rs. 44,33,55,403 [36,91,12,995 + 7,42,42,408] for the reason that these expenses are brand promotion expenditures of USL logo, it promotes the brand the assessee, gives enduring benefit and hence capital in nature. The DRP confirmed the action of the AO. 12.6.1 Similar

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

disallowed the sales promotion and advertisement expenses totally amounting to Rs. 44,33,55,403 [36,91,12,995 + 7,42,42,408] for the reason that these expenses are brand promotion expenditures of USL logo, it promotes the brand the assessee, gives enduring benefit and hence capital in nature. The DRP confirmed the action of the AO. 12.6.1 Similar

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and the

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanshri S Jayaramanit(Tp)A No.281 /Bang/2015 (Asst. Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. M/S Novell Software Development India Pvt. Ltd., ‘Laurel, ‘Block-D, 65/2, Bagmane Tech Park, C.V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore-560 093. . Respondent

disallowance under the provision is only in relation to expenditure incurred which would be deductible while computing the total income and would therefore apply only to revenue expenditure. Depreciation is in the nature of an allowance, that is, a statutory deduction under Section 32 of the Act, and does not represent an outgo/ expenditure to attract the provisions of Section

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

disallowed Rs.48,000/- and Rs.3,81,256/- respectively for both the\n Assessment Years. Assessee's submissions were not accepted by the AO and\nthe AO has applied section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2, LTU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

256/- and made a suo moto disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Act, amounting to ₹11,54,264/- only

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

256/- and made a suo moto disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Act, amounting to ₹11,54,264/- only

NORTHERN OPERATING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ARGON SOUTH TOWER vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5 (1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21 M/S. Northern Operating Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor Rmz Ecopace, Circle – 5(1)(1), Campus 1C, Bengaluru. Sarjapur Outer Ring Road, Bellandur, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan : Aaccn 1652 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Divya Motwani, Ca. Revenue By : Shri. D. K. Mishra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2024

disallowing the claim of deduction of INR 1,12,23,296 under section 8oG of the Act by holding that amount paid out of Corporate Social Responsibility ('CSR') expenditure is ineligible for such deduction. 3. That the learned AO erred in stating that the amounts paid to eligible entities specified in section 8oG of the Act as a part

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BOSCH LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed and revenue’s appeal for the A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

256 as interest in respect of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises as required under Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 and a similar amount has been shown in the return in Schedule BP Col. A-19 as interest which is not allowable under Section 23 of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed

SUBEX LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhury

section 37(1). In the case of Badridas Gauridu (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, 261 ITR 256 (Bom), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that hedging contracts were incidental to assessee’s business of export of cotton, and therefore losses represented a business loss to the assessee. Following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

disallowance of Rs.1,93,730 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D. 7. Ground Nos. 6 to 8 : Addition u/s.41(1) of the Act. 7.1 These grounds are raised in respect of the addition made under Section 41(1) of the Act in respect of the difference in liability towards Karnataka Breweries & Distilleries Ltd. (‘KBDL