IIFL SAMASTA FINANCE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

reassessment\nunder sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been\npaid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and\n(b) no appeal against the order referred to in clause (a) has been filed.\n(2) An application referred to in sub-section (1) shall be made within one month

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

9 of 56 Entity AY Section ITA No. ITR Offered to tax Category D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed under section 148 of the Act 2017- 544/Bang/2024 Filed but In ROI filed IBM Corporation 270A

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

9 of 56 Entity AY Section ITA No. ITR Offered to tax Category D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed under section 148 of the Act 2017- 544/Bang/2024 Filed but In ROI filed IBM Corporation 270A

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

9 of 56 Entity AY Section ITA No. ITR Offered to tax Category D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed under section 148 of the Act 2017- 544/Bang/2024 Filed but In ROI filed IBM Corporation 270A

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

9 of 56 Entity AY Section ITA No. ITR Offered to tax Category D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed under section 148 of the Act 2017- 544/Bang/2024 Filed but In ROI filed IBM Corporation 270A

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

9) of the Act suggest a willful negligence or a misreporting of income which is made with full knowledge. Thus the main contention of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is that the assessee should have misreported with full intention of evading taxes & mens-rea should be present in order to levy penalty U/s 270A of the Act. In the opinion

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM CHINA HONG KONG LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

COMPAGNIE IBM FRANCE,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM JAPAN LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM AUSTRALIA LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

COMPAGNIE IBM FRANCE,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nIT(IT)A Nos.487 to 504/Bang/2024 &\nIT(IT)A Nos.541 to 546/Bang/2024\nIBM Canada Limited & Others\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section

IBM CANADA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

9 of 56\nEntity\nAY\nSection\nITA No.\nITR\nOffered to\ntax\nCategory D: 270A case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been\nfiled however, secondment related receipts were offered to tax only in the return filed\nunder section 148 of the Act\nIBM Corporation\n2017-\n270A\n544/Bang/2024\nFiled but\nIn ROI filed\n18\nnot

IBM OSTERREICH INTIONATIONALE BUROMASCHINEN GESELLSCHAFT MBH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

reassessment\nproceedings.\n- The CIT(A) has distinguished the facts\nof the case from Karnataka HC's\nruling in Manjunatha Cotton &\nGinning Factory [2013] 35\nTaxmann.com 250 (Karnataka HC)\n- The CIT(A) has concluded that the\nprovisions of 270A(8) need not be\ninvoked and that the case of the\nAssessee is covered under section\n270A(2)(a) / 270A