EPSON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ULSOOR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 by issue of notice u/s. 148 on 15.09.2017. The matter was referred to TPO to determine the ALP of international transaction. The TPO wide order dated 28.10.2019 treated the Advertising, Marketing and Promotional (AMP) expenditure incurred by the assessee as a separate international transaction and calculated average AMP expenses on sales of comparables

M/S NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

method of computing the income and application excluding the loans advanced by the assessee to SHG and recovery of the loans from SHG that was considered as income. The Assessing Officer has arrived at the belief that income has escaped assessment by virtue of the fact that Shri Pushparaj Jain has received an advance of Rs.2.50 Crores towards sale

M/S.NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , , MANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

method of computing the income and application excluding the loans advanced by the assessee to SHG and recovery of the loans from SHG that was considered as income. The Assessing Officer has arrived at the belief that income has escaped assessment by virtue of the fact that Shri Pushparaj Jain has received an advance of Rs.2.50 Crores towards sale

M/S INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PARK LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-11(2), BANGALORE

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

TP adjustment towards excess payment of premium on redemption of shares. (ii) The ld. AR also submitted that the valuation of preference shares is done in accordance with Rule 11UA(1)(c)(b) of the I.T. Rules and accordingly shares of the assessee have been valued by an independent Chartered Accountant under the NAV method. (iii) Rule 11UA

M/S INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PARK LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1)(4), BANGALORE

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

TP adjustment towards excess payment of premium on redemption of shares. (ii) The ld. AR also submitted that the valuation of preference shares is done in accordance with Rule 11UA(1)(c)(b) of the I.T. Rules and accordingly shares of the assessee have been valued by an independent Chartered Accountant under the NAV method. (iii) Rule 11UA

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. N G BALU REDDY HUF, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2009-10

method of valuation. 14. It was also submitted that the action of AO against Anita (Ind) had formed an opinion that capital gain arising from JDA is assessable in the hands of Mrs. Anita G.(Indl) and concluded the assessment on 25.03.2013 rejecting the plea that the assessable entity is HUF and not Individual. The learned AO recorded the reasons

NIKE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. He submitted that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details to the AO during the course of original assessment proceedings and hence, there is no failure as contemplated in the proviso to sec. 147 of the Act. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case

M/S.NIKE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. He submitted that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details to the AO during the course of original assessment proceedings and hence, there is no failure as contemplated in the proviso to sec. 147 of the Act. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case

M/S NIKE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. He submitted that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details to the AO during the course of original assessment proceedings and hence, there is no failure as contemplated in the proviso to sec. 147 of the Act. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case

NIKE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is allowed and all other appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. He submitted that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details to the AO during the course of original assessment proceedings and hence, there is no failure as contemplated in the proviso to sec. 147 of the Act. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case

M/S ONMOBILE GLOBAL LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

u/s. 244A (Grounds 26 to 26.2) 9. Penalty proceedings (Grounds 27 to 27.1) 3. The assessee has raised additional by way of ground No.28 with regard to deduction in respect of unclaimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC). The ld AR submitted that the issue of claiming deduction for taxes paid outside India in respect of which no credit is claimed

M/S. ONMOBILE GLOBAL LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 5(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

u/s. 244A (Grounds 26 to 26.2) 9. Penalty proceedings (Grounds 27 to 27.1) 3. The assessee has raised additional by way of ground No.28 with regard to deduction in respect of unclaimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC). The ld AR submitted that the issue of claiming deduction for taxes paid outside India in respect of which no credit is claimed

M/S BOSCH LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, Pan: Aaacm 9840P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.2. This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals), Bangalore-9, Bangalore Dated 31.3.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 3. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Deduction U/S. 35(2Ab) Computed On Net Expenditure As Opposed To Gross Expenditure Disallowance Of Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts I) Disallowance Of Provision For Long Term Service Award Disallowance Of Expenditure U/S. 14A Of The Act Ii) Page 2 Of 67

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.] Rule 8D. (1) Where the Assessing Officer, having regard to the accounts of the assessee of a previous

GOOGLE IRELAND LIMITED,IRELAND vs. DCIT (IT), JCIT(OSD) (IT) - CIRCLE 1(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147, 92CA and 144C(13) dated 18.01.2024 for AYs 2013-14 &2014- 15 and 25.1.2024 for AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively. The issue IT(IT)A Nos.191 to 194/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 43 involved in all these appeals is common and hence they are heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. The brief facts

GOOGLE IRELAND LIMITED,IRELAND vs. DCIT (IT), JCIT(OSD) (IT) - CIRCLE 1(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

147, 92CA and 144C(13) dated 18.01.2024 for AYs 2013-14 &2014- 15 and 25.1.2024 for AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively. The issue IT(IT)A Nos.191 to 194/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 43 involved in all these appeals is common and hence they are heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. The brief facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. R. MUNIRAJU (HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11

u/s. 153C of the Act is upheld and order of the CIT(Appeals) is reversed on this issue.” 18. The provisions of section 153C(1) reads as follows – “153C. (1)Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery

M/S. IBM INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

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

TP)A No.725/Bang/2018 Asst.Yr.2013-14 Ltd vs DCIT in ITA No.1413/Pun/2019 for assessment year 2010-11 by order dated 02/12/2019, addressed identical issue. He placed rrliance on following paragraphs: “4. The foundation of the action of the authorities below for the denial of deduction is premised on the understanding that the modified return cannot breach the mandate

GOOGLE IRELAND LIMITED,IRELAND vs. DCIT (IT), JCIT(OSD) (IT) - CIRCLE 1(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TP)A 1513 to\n1516/Bang/2013 the issue was decided in favour of GIPL by the Tribunal by\nholding that the impugned payment made by it to GIL cannot be\ncharacterised as royalty under Act or DTAA. The relevant findings of the\nTribunal in the case of payer, i.e. GIPL reads as follows: -\n“13. We have heard rival submissions