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 11. 40(a)(i) — The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned assessing officer in disallowing payments made to overseas subsidiaries totally amounting to Rs. 269

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

disallowance of the deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act in respect of flats which are more than 1500 sq.ft. of built-up area. ITA Nos.1275 & 1323/Bang/2014 M/s.Brigade Enterprises Ltd., Page 13 of 25 The learned Departmental Representative, however, supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. Having gone through the records and having perused the decision of this Tribunal

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

M/S TEJATS NETWORKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

section 35(2AB) of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Without prejudice the learned Assessing officer has erred in considering the average value of investment in tax free instruments at Rs.48,26,49,269/- as against the correct amount a sum of Rs.39,47,41,359/- for the purpose of quantification of disallowance

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 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru Page 14 of 62 4. Ground Nos.1 to 4 in the AY 2014-15 and ground Nos.1 & 2 in the AY 2015-16 are general in nature, which do not require any adjudication

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 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. IT(TP)A No.3336/Bang/2018 & IT(TP)A No.199/Bang/2021 M/s. Praxier India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru Page 14 of 62 4. Ground Nos.1 to 4 in the AY 2014-15 and ground Nos.1 & 2 in the AY 2015-16 are general in nature, which do not require any adjudication

DUSTERS TOTAL SOLUTIONS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 43B of the Act when paid before filing the return of income. In this regard the assessee referred decision of The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Sabari Enterprises reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essae Teraoka reported in 366 ITR 408. Accordingly, the assessee argued that, when PF/ESI contributions are paid before filing the return, no disallowance

DUSTERS TOTAL SOLUTIONS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 43B of the Act when paid before filing the return of income. In this regard the assessee referred decision of The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Sabari Enterprises reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essae Teraoka reported in 366 ITR 408. Accordingly, the assessee argued that, when PF/ESI contributions are paid before filing the return, no disallowance

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

section 14A will not apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. IT(TP)A No.281/B/15 CO No.101/B/15 6 10. Respectfully following the above said decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, we dismiss ground No.1 raised by the department. 11. With respect to Ground No.2 the assessee’s submissions on the revenue

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 of the Act was passed 11.12.2023 dismissing the appeal filed. 3. The appellant submits that it has created multiple mail id’s over a period of time, such

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 of the Act was passed 11.12.2023 dismissing the appeal filed. 3. The appellant submits that it has created multiple mail id’s over a period of time, such

FINASTRA SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No. 189/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Finastra Software Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., 4Th To 6Th Floor, Virgo The Deputy Building, Bagmane Commissioner Of Constellation Income Tax, Business Park Outer Circle – 3 (1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Dodanekundi, Bangalore. Pan: Aaack9067G Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-03-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Final Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2022 Was Not Communicated In The Manner Prescribed Under The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & The Rules Made Thereunder & Therefore The Proceedings Are Null & Void.

section 80G of the Act. Assessee is directed to file all requisite details in order to substantiate its claim before Ld.AO. Ld.AO is then directed to grant deduction to the extent of eligibility. 70. Respectfully following the above decision of the coordinate bench we remit the issue to the AO with a direction to verify the details and allow

M/S. ATRIA CONVERGENCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE- 1, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2011-12

disallowance to the extent of INR 5,269,856 made by the AO of the amount of sundry creditors as cessation of liability under section

DUSTERS TOTAL SOLUTIONS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

section 43B of the Act when\npaid before filing the return of income. In this regard the assessee\nreferred decision of The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Sabari\nEnterprises reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essae Teraoka reported in 366\nITR 408. Accordingly, the assessee argued that, when PF/ESI\ncontributions are paid before filing the return, no disallowance