FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

reassessment / non-deduction of TDS at source shall be issued where buyback of shares has taken place prior to 1.6.2013 and the case

ABHERAJ BALDOTA FOUNDATION ,HOSPET vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

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

deduction u/s 11(2) appears to have been restricted to the extent of Rs.148.60 lakhs. We noticed that,in the reassessment

M/S. HYAGREEVA HOTELS & RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 3, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

reassessment proceedings, the AO denied deduction u/s. 80IB(7) of the Act on the ground that the project approval was granted

M/S. HYAGREEVA HOTELS & RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 3, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

reassessment proceedings, the AO denied deduction u/s. 80IB(7) of the Act on the ground that the project approval was granted

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NOUS INFOSYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2006-07

deduction u/s. 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”]. The Assessing Officer in the reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 computed

CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, V.P. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

reassessment proceedings. The assessee has wrongly claimed deduction u/s 80-IB, which is more than the deduction claimed in the original

CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, V.P. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

reassessment proceedings. The assessee has wrongly claimed deduction u/s 80-IB, which is more than the deduction claimed in the original

CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, V.P. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

reassessment proceedings. The assessee has wrongly claimed deduction u/s 80-IB, which is more than the deduction claimed in the original

NVIDIA GRAPHICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee s party allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Mahadevpura Village, Central Circle – 2(4), K. R. Puram Hobli, Marathalli Bangalore. Bagmane Goldstone Building, North Tower, Mahadevpura S.O, Bangalore – 560 048. Pan : Aabcn 9200 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024

deduct TDS on certain payment and further reassessment order was passed making disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), since assessee

M/S. RITTAL INDIA PVT LTD,DODDABALLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE 1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2010-11

deduction u/s.80JJAA of the Act in a sum of Rs.15,35,357/- and the same was allowed in Assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act by order dated 28.11.2014. Subsequently, the AO initiated reassessment

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NOUS INFO SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaramani.T.A No.63/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -5(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Nous Info Systems P. Ltd, No.1, 1St Main, 1St Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru 560 004 .. Respondent Pan : Aaacn4584B Assessee By : Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Vijaykumar N, Addl. Cit Heard On : 14.09.2016 Pronounced On : 11 .11.2016 O R D E R Per S. Jayaraman:

deduction under section 10A at Rs.3,993,274/- . In the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer ('AO') made, inter alia, the following

M/S. BIOCON LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU,, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the legal issue raised in ground no

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint M/S. Biocon Ltd., Commissioner Of 20Th Km, Hosur Road, Income-Tax, Electronic City, Large Tax Payers Bangalore – 560 100. Unit [Ltu], Pan: Aaacb7461R Vs. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For A.Y. 2010-11 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein Below Are Independent & Without Prejudice To The Other Grounds Preferred By The Appellant. 1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The ' Case & In Law, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals ["Cit(A)"] Dated March 28, 2018 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") For Ay 2010-11 To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Facts & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Scope Of Re-Assessment Proceedings

reassessment proceedings was initiated based on a mere "change of opinion" and therefore lacking jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act and hence the proceedings are deemed to invalid and void ab initio. 3. Disallowance of clinical trial expenditure in the claim of weighted deduction

SOBHA SUBURBIA APARTMENTS OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

reassessment the Assessing Officer made the addition of the interest amount apart from disallowance of certain expenses for want of deduction

M/S ILC INDUSTRIES,HOSPET vs. PR. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaraman

deduction or allowance could not be entertained in the reassessment proceedings and hence the order of the Pr.CIT is in accordance

IBM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

reassessing additional issues (not included in the original notice). 3. Deductibility of sales tax paid on sale of PC division

INVITROGEN BIOSERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. PR. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai, Judical Member

reassessment vide order dated 31/10/13 for both assessment years under consideration by denying following:  deduction under section 10B of the Act pertaining

MAHADEVI,KALABURGI vs. ITO, WARD-1 & TPS, GULBARGA

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

reassessment order of the assessing officer by not giving benefit of deduction of 50% of interest income u/s 57(iv) of the Act under

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S SHIPARA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanit A No.15(Bang) 2014 (Assessment Year : 196-97) M/S Gem Superstructures Pvt. Ltd., No.120, Hoodi Apartments, Ground Floor, Peenya Industrial Area, Cunningham Road, Bangalore -560 052 Pan No.Aaacg5031E Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(3), Bangalore Respondent & Ita No.1766(Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 1996-97) (By Revenue)

deduction of Rs.35 lakhs as expenditure. 3.5 During the course of reassessment proceedings) the AO had issued al notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) .on 4/6/2010

GEM SUPER STRUCTURE P. LTD. vs. DCIT,

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

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanit A No.15(Bang) 2014 (Assessment Year : 196-97) M/S Gem Superstructures Pvt. Ltd., No.120, Hoodi Apartments, Ground Floor, Peenya Industrial Area, Cunningham Road, Bangalore -560 052 Pan No.Aaacg5031E Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(3), Bangalore Respondent & Ita No.1766(Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 1996-97) (By Revenue)

deduction of Rs.35 lakhs as expenditure. 3.5 During the course of reassessment proceedings) the AO had issued al notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) .on 4/6/2010