BHARAT MINE AND MINERALS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of Revenue for Assessment Years 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

section 10B of the Act. Even in the course of statement on oath on 3/11/2010 on confrontation, the wrong claim has been admitted. 7. FORMATION OF EOU BY TRANSFER OF USER COMMISSIONER IN EXCESS OF 20% The old machinery used by the assessee was exceeding the prescribed limit of 20%. Without prejudice to the above contention it is submitted that

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

M/S MARMON FOOD & BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-11(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

reassessment proceeding is invalid. 2.5. The learned lower authorities are not justified in failing to appreciate that Section 149 governs that field which is not covered by proviso to Section 147 and therefore the time limit prescribed under Section 149(1)(b) does not apply to the case of the Appellant. 3. As regards Learned Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the action

M/S MARMON FOOD & BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-11(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

reassessment proceeding is invalid. 2.5. The learned lower authorities are not justified in failing to appreciate that Section 149 governs that field which is not covered by proviso to Section 147 and therefore the time limit prescribed under Section 149(1)(b) does not apply to the case of the Appellant. 3. As regards Learned Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the action

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S APOTEX PHARMACHEM INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

section 10B of the Act with respect to Research & Development services on the ground that: i) The same does not amount to manufacturing or producing articles or things; Page 11 of 16 ii.The approval was not granted by Development Commissioner w.r.t. R&D activities; 23. The AO in the draft assessment order had denied the benefit of 10B

BANGALORE RAJU MUDALIAR MOHAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 10(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed by both the years under consideration stands allowed

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

section 10B on identical grounds. In our view this clearly amounts to change of opinion. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Kelvinator India Ltd reported in 320 ITR 561 held that the concept of “opinion” must be treated as an inbuilt test to check abuse of power by the assessing officer Hon’ble Court further held that

BANGALORE RAJU MUDALIAR MOHAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 10(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed by both the years under consideration stands allowed

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

section 10B on identical grounds. In our view this clearly amounts to change of opinion. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Kelvinator India Ltd reported in 320 ITR 561 held that the concept of “opinion” must be treated as an inbuilt test to check abuse of power by the assessing officer Hon’ble Court further held that

M/S RAMSOFT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Ramsoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd. No.104A, 4Th Cross, Electronic City, Hosur Road, Bangalore-561229. … Appellant Pa No.Aaacr 6948 R Vs. Deputy Commisioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(4), Bangalore. … Respondent

reassessment is bad in law. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) could not have recorded the reason that the income has escaped assessment because of the loss of the earlier year have to be set-off before allowing the deduction u/s 10A of the Act, as the Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench had held that such

V.S.L. MINING COMPANY PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ACIT vs. M/S VSL MINING CO. P. LTD.,,

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU vs. RASHTROTTHANA PARISHAT, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017=18

10B has declared the amount of income applied to charitable or religious purposes in India during the Asst. year 2017-18 as Rs. 67,70,38,920/- [ Rs.55,56,54,057/- (revenue expenditure) + Rs. 8,11,20,826/- (capital expenditure)] which amounts to claim of double deduction & the same is accepted by the assessee on the I. Tax web portal

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE , BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S. RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all these seven appeals are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodia

reassess and is thus vague, consequently the assessment order passed on an invalid notice is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. b) The learned authorities below have not dealt in the respective order on the objection filed by the appellant in respect of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A and have also not provided the satisfaction

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (LTU),, BENGALURU vs. M/S. VIJAYA BANK, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

10B provided such deputation of manpower is for the development of such software and all the prescribed conditions are fulfilled." 39. Though the aforesaid circular was not available before the Assessing Authority at the time of issue of notice under Section 147/148 of the Act, the same throws light on the aspect of deployment of technical manpower