SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

d) due to being its dangers nature.\n\n74. Therefore, the law recognizes such a situation and has provided a remedy\nto tackle such problems. The authorised officer has been given a discretion for\nthe reasons to be recorded in writing to pass a restraint order in respect of the\narticles, books and other material which he could not take

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources. Insofar as income under the head 'profits and gains of business or professions' is concerned, provisions thereto are contained in Sections 28 to 44DB of the Act. Section 28 specifies various incomes which shall be chargeable to income tax under this head. Thereafter, Section

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

d) due to being its dangers nature.\n74. Therefore, the law recognizes such a situation and has provided a remedy\nto tackle such problems. The authorised officer has been given a discretion for\nthe reasons to be recorded in writing to pass a restraint order in respect of the\narticles, books and other material which he could not take physical

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED., ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources. Insofar as income under the head 'profits and gains of business or professions' is concerned, provisions thereto are contained in Sections 28 to 44DB of the Act. Section 28 specifies various incomes which shall be chargeable to income tax under this head. Thereafter, Section

M/S. VIJAYANAGAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

house and also borrowed a gold loan of Rs.9,13,990 from Muthoot Finance Ltd. This loan was repaid of Rs.1,49,66,540/- to Standard Chartered Bank and Rs.9,30,990/- to the Muthoot Gold Loan. As these loans were never obtained for the benefit of the trust, the repayment of the loan was made out of the trust

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

133 of Companies Act, 2013, Similarly, the interest paid on loans borrowed for acquiring shares is a deductible expense for computation of the income under the head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession" as per the provisions of section 36(i)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Income Computation and Disclosure Standard-IX. d

M/S. MADURA COATS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX., (INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION), CIRCLE- 1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

d) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of DIT v Krupp UDHE GMBH ITA No. 2626 of 2009 Page 8 IT(IT)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 e) Decision of Hon’ble Kolkotta High Court in case of CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. (Now Dunlop Holdings Ltd) reported in 142 ITR 493 f) Decision

M/S. MADURA COATS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX., (INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION), CIRCLE- 1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

d) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of DIT v Krupp UDHE GMBH ITA No. 2626 of 2009 Page 8 IT(IT)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 e) Decision of Hon’ble Kolkotta High Court in case of CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. (Now Dunlop Holdings Ltd) reported in 142 ITR 493 f) Decision

SRI. K. SATISH KUMAR,BENGALURU vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-9, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

house property. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the decision of the High Court set aside. There will be no order as to costs." *underlining for emphasis” 6.2 Having regard to the parity of reasoning of the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AMIYA BALA PAUL (Supra), it is noted that a Valuation Officer

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTPU , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

133(6). g) The Ld. Panel erred in confirming the same. The Ld. AO/ Ld. TPO also erred in treating provisions for doubtful h) debts as non-operating in nature while calculating the net margins •of the comparable companies: The Ld. Panel also erred in confirming the same. The Ld. AO/Ld. TPO also erred on facts in erroneously computing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU vs. SHRI KEMPAREDDY GOVINDRAJU, DOMLUR, BENGALURU

House property\nand Income from Other Sources. He also admitted agricultural income\nof Rs.91,000/-. The return of income was processed under section\n143(1) of the Act returning a Nil demand.\n6. A search under section 132 of the Act was conducted on\n15.03.2016 at Room No. 306 Hotel CIDADE-DE- GOA and at his\nresidence at Door No.206

SHRI M. THIMMEGOWDA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 2(14) and there was no capital gains tax ITA Nos.1035 & 1036/Bang/2019 Page 45 of 78 arising out of such sales within the meaning of the definition of the term “capital asset”. Since the assessee did not offer any capital gain and claimed that it was agricultural land though it was converted into non-agricultural residential purpose, the case

SHRI M. THIMMEGOWDA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

section 2(14) and there was no capital gains tax ITA Nos.1035 & 1036/Bang/2019 Page 45 of 78 arising out of such sales within the meaning of the definition of the term “capital asset”. Since the assessee did not offer any capital gain and claimed that it was agricultural land though it was converted into non-agricultural residential purpose, the case

SRI RATHAN BABULAL LATH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A) dated 9.12.2019 for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. Facts of the case are that there was a search & seizure action u/s 132 of the Act in the case of assessee and group concerns of Wallmark Group on 7.1.2015. Consequent

SHRI. KEMPAREDDY GOVINDRAJ,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

House property \nand Income from Other Sources. He also admitted agricultural income \nof Rs.91,000/-. The return of income was processed under section \n143(1) of the Act returning a Nil demand.\n\n6. A search under section 132 of the Act was conducted on \n15.03.2016 at Room No. 306 Hotel CIDADE-DE- GOA and at his \nresidence at Door

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Housing relied upon by the ITAT has bee considered by this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bengaluru Vs. IBC ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 18 of 41 Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. It has also been considered by the Delhi High Court in Commissioner

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Housing relied upon by the ITAT has bee considered by this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bengaluru Vs. IBC ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 18 of 41 Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. It has also been considered by the Delhi High Court in Commissioner

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Housing relied upon by the ITAT has bee considered by this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bengaluru Vs. IBC ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 18 of 41 Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. It has also been considered by the Delhi High Court in Commissioner

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Housing relied upon by the ITAT has bee considered by this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bengaluru Vs. IBC ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 18 of 41 Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. and Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. It has also been considered by the Delhi High Court in Commissioner