151 results for “disallowance”+ Section 92Bclear
Sorted by relevance
Key Topics
Showing 1–20 of 151 · Page 1 of 8
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed
Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 404/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Sasken Technologies Ltd., (Formerly Known As The Deputy Sasken Communication Commissioner Of Technologies Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 139/25, Domlur Circle – 6(1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aaecs6424R Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jcit Revenue By Dr Itat Date Of Hearing : 15-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-11-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Assessment Order Dated 31.01.2017 Passed By Ld.Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal: “1. General:- The Learned Ao & The Drp Erred In Passing The Order / Directions In The Manner Passed By Them. The Orders Passed Being Bad In Law Is Liable To Be Quashed.
92B of the IT Act. (iii) determining / confirming the adjustment of Rs. 275,238/- under section 92CA in respect of the corporate guarantee given to Sasken OY (iv) computing adjustment under section 92CA at 0.925% of the corporate guarantee amount given to Sasken OY; (v) using the information obtained from M/s CRISIL Ltd under section 133(6) for the purpose