M/S MAXIM INDIA INTERGRATED CIRCUIT DESIGN PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

property transferred or services provided in either transaction; (b) the functions performed, taking into account assets employed or to be employed and the risks assumed, by the respective parties to the transactions; (c) the contractual terms (whether or not such terms are formal or in writing) of the transactions which lay down explicitly or implicitly how the responsibilities, risks

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

iia) of sub-section (1) of\nsection 132 ?\n(4) Afford the authorised officer necessary facility to look into the electronic\nrecord as provided under clause (iib) of sub-section (1) of section 132 ?\n(5) Seized any book of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery,\netc. ?\n(6) Placed any marks of identification, on any books of account, other

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

iia) of sub-section (1) of\nsection 132 ?\n(4) Afford the authorised officer necessary facility to look into the electronic\nrecord as provided under clause (iib) of sub-section (1) of section 132 ?\n(5) Seized any book of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery,\netc. ?\n(6) Placed any marks of identification, on any books of account, other

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

property held under trust or other legal obligation wholly for charitable or religious purposes or in part only for such purposes, or of income being voluntary contributions referred to in sub- clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, shall, if the total income in respect of which he is assessable as a representative assessee (the total income for this

INFOSYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

house or computer programmer. This is frequently the way in which customized software is developed and acquired by the user/purchaser. The level of activities/services rendered will vary with each contract. At one end of the spectrum, the customers needs may require that a programme be created virtually from scratch. At the other end of spectrum, a minor modification

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S SOBHA DEVELOPERS LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. George

property developer carrying on several housing projects in the city of Bangalore and other metros in India. The addition challenged in ground No.2 by the revenue is a sum of Rs.5,06,11,025. This comprises of two sums viz., a sum of Rs.1,55,18,769 and another sum of Rs.3,50,92,256. 5. Addition

MICROLABS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ADDL. CI.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals viz

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

house R & D Centre from the gross expenditure outflow on R & D. He was of the view that in the present case the applicability of the DSIR guidelines is not disputed. The substance of the impugned provisions in the guideline for reducing receipts of the R & D Centre from the outflow is also very clear. Hence, the issue on hand

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S MICRO LABS LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals viz

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

house R & D Centre from the gross expenditure outflow on R & D. He was of the view that in the present case the applicability of the DSIR guidelines is not disputed. The substance of the impugned provisions in the guideline for reducing receipts of the R & D Centre from the outflow is also very clear. Hence, the issue on hand

MICRO LABS LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals viz

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

house R & D Centre from the gross expenditure outflow on R & D. He was of the view that in the present case the applicability of the DSIR guidelines is not disputed. The substance of the impugned provisions in the guideline for reducing receipts of the R & D Centre from the outflow is also very clear. Hence, the issue on hand

MEDREICH LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 451/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Medreich Ltd., No. 12/8, Medreich The Assistant House, Commissioner Of Saraswati Ammal Income Tax, Street, Central Circle – Maruti Seva Nagar, 1(2), Vs. Bangalore – 560 033. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm1458Q Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Assessee By Khincha, Ca : Shri Praveen Karanth, Revenue By Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Ld.Acit, Central Circle – 1(2), Bangalore Dated 26/04/2022 For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “General Ground 1.1 The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore (`A0') Erred In Passing The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (`The Act) In The Manner Passed

House, Commissioner of Saraswati Ammal Income Tax, Street, Central Circle – Maruti Seva Nagar, 1(2), Vs. Bangalore – 560 033. Bangalore. PAN: AABCM1458Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri Padam Chand Assessee by Khincha, CA : Shri Praveen Karanth, Revenue by CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27-07-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21-10-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed