M/S. NIRMAL ENVIRO SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

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

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed. On this count also, we do not find any merit in the argument of assessee’s counsel. 8.2 Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of AA 520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2022) 138 taxmann.com 571 wherein held as under: _ In this case the assessee

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

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed. On this count also, we do not find any merit in the argument of assessee’s counsel. 8.2 Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of AA 520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2022) 138 taxmann.com 571 wherein held as under: _ In this case the assessee

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

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

disallowed. On this count also, we do not find any merit in the argument of assessee’s counsel. 8.2 Further, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of AA 520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2022) 138 taxmann.com 571 wherein held as under: _ In this case the assessee

SUBRAMANYA KARTHIK,BHADRAVATHI vs. ITO, WARD- 1 & TPS, SHIMOGA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

SMT. VASANTHI PADMANABHA SHERUGAR,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, BELLARY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20

disallowing a sum of Rs.43,18,915/-, being the delayed payment of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under respective Acts. The assessee filed an rectification application under section 154 of the Act and the same was rejected. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The CIT(A), by relying on the judgment

M/S. BHARAT ELECTRONICS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Ltu, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacb5985C Appellant Respondent

1,30,000/- under Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D in its return of income and it is humbly submitted that disallowance to the tune of Rs. 4,69,055/- (5,99,055-1,30,000) on total investments is unjustified. B. Disallowance of Foreign exchange loss of Rs. 48,23,924/- under Section 43A

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-12 , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

disallowed and added back to the income of the respective undertakings/units of the assessee company. 4. The ld. A.R. submitted that during the assessment year 2009- 10, the assessee incurred an aggregate loss of Rs. 129,94,15,659/- (comprising of loss of Rs. 78,69,47,279/- arising on restatement of forward contracts, and realised loss

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

disallowed and added back to the income of the respective undertakings/units of the assessee company. 4. The ld. A.R. submitted that during the assessment year 2009- 10, the assessee incurred an aggregate loss of Rs. 129,94,15,659/- (comprising of loss of Rs. 78,69,47,279/- arising on restatement of forward contracts, and realised loss

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

disallowed and added back to the income of the respective undertakings/units of the assessee company. 4. The ld. A.R. submitted that during the assessment year 2009- 10, the assessee incurred an aggregate loss of Rs. 129,94,15,659/- (comprising of loss of Rs. 78,69,47,279/- arising on restatement of forward contracts, and realised loss

CISCO SYSTEMS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

disallowed under section 43B of the Act (not made before the due date of filing the return) were separately added back in the computation of income. Therefore, there was neither error nor prejudice to the revenue. 13. On the second issue of reduction of realized foreign exchange gain of ₹32,77,83,741, the ld. AR submitted that the gain

EVRY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1) , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2013-14

43A of the Act cannot be invoked to disallow the claim. 8.2 It is further submitted that the borrowing of money and the acquisition of assets are two different and independent transactions. This principle has been clearly stated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. reported

M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that

M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that

M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that

M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,SPECIAL RANGE - 1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that

M/S. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers Limited v. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC) where the Apex Court held that deduction for a business liability which has arisen during a particular year should be allowed in that year in its entirety. The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO therefore erred in disallowing the same and he prayed that