DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. VIJAYA BANK, BARODA CORPORATE CENTRE BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX

In the result, the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2010-11

reassessment order passed u/s. 143(3) rws 147 of Page 2 of 8 the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] dated 7.2.2013 by the JCIT, LTU, Bangalore , was partly allowed. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTL TAXN) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S COFFEEDAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

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

194A(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is not applicable. Thus, .even if a provision is made in the books, no taxes would be deductible at source, if the provision is reversed and no payment made. The Karnataka High Court referred to C.O. No. 42/Bang/2019 the Delhi High Court’s decision where it was held that mere

CANARA BANK (ERSTWHILE SYNDICATE BANK),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order\nenhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or\notherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under Section 154, for\nany assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April 2001.\n9.\nFrom perusal of Section 14A of the Act, it is evident that for the\npurposes of computing

BASAVA ROAWAYS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,SEDAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GULBARGA, GULBARGA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

Section Amount (Rs.) Ultratech Cement 194C 12,41,23,184 Vasavadatta Cement 194C 5,68,01,670 . ITA No.565 /Bang/2025 Page 3 of 16 Total 18,09,24,854 6. Considering the above receipts of Rs. 18,09,24,854 reflected in Form 26AS, the AO proceeded to estimate the income of the assessee by applying a profit rate

VISHNU VARDHANA RAM YARA,MACHILIPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2013-14

reassessment under section 147 of the Act, a notice under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 was issued and served and subsequently under section 142(1) Page 2 of 6 of the Act was issued but assessee did not file the return of income. Thereafter, several opportunities were provided to the assessee to comply with the notices. Assessee

DCIT, HASSAN vs. M/S SUJATHA NARAYAN & ASSOCIATES, HASSAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

194A(3) has not been provided to Sec 194H of the IT Act, vis-a-vis to the deduction of taxes at source and that the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has been properly done while concluding the assessment proceedings. 4. The Ld CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that, while making disallowance u/s 40(3)(ia), the definition

M/S. SUJATHA NARAYANAN & ASSOCIATES,HASSAN vs. ACIT, HASSAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

194A(3) has not been provided to Sec 194H of the IT Act, vis-a-vis to the deduction of taxes at source and that the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has been properly done while concluding the assessment proceedings. 4. The Ld CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that, while making disallowance u/s 40(3)(ia), the definition

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise .increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154 for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. 6.2.4 Accordingly, it was proposed to the assessee that the disallowance u/s 14A will be made by invoking

SHRI. G. MALLIKARJUNA NAIDU,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

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

194A of the Act, assessee was required to deduct TDS for payment of interest on nonbanking financial companies, and hence disallowance of interest payment as per provisions of section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act was made. The Ld.AO also restricted depreciation claimed at 15% as against 30% claimed by assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, assessee filed