INDO NISSIN FOODS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

section 115JB.” 10. It was submitted that the set off of unabsorbed depreciation loss against the book profit in earlier years were as follows:- Particulars Total Brought Unabsorbed Depreciation Forward Loss Business Loss Rs. Rs. Rs. 2005-06 (AY:2006-07) 48,34,69,216 15,48,05,581 63,82,74,797 Less: Adjusted during the year - 2,68

M/S. TEXTRON INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoi.T. (T.P) A. No.1228/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) M/S. Textron India Private Limited, (Formerly Known As Textron Global Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd.) Global Village, Rvce Post, Mylasandra, Off Mysore Road, Bangalore-560 059 …. Appellant. Pan Aacct 0118M Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 12(4), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri P.K. Prasad. Respondent By : Smt. Neera Malhotra, Cit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 13.1.2016. O R D E R Per Shri Vijaypal Rao, J.M. :

forward before the lower authorities: a. iGate Global Solutions Limited b. Infosys Limited c. Mindtree Limited d. Persistent Systems Limited e. Sasken Communication Limited. f. Flextronics Software Systems Limited. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary

MINDTECK (INDIA) LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. George

Section 10A. 29. The Assessee filed return of income for AY 06-07 declaring loss of Rs.8,43,640/-. The Assessee had claimed deduction u/s.10A of the Act at Rs.1,51,13,126/-. The total turnover, Export Turnover and profits of the business on the basis of which the Assessee computed deduction u/s.10A was Total Turnover of Rs.3

AUGUST JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

carried forward from earlier years,\nincluding opening balances or credits already recorded and\nacted upon in prior assessments, cannot be taxed again in a\nsubsequent year without reopening the earlier assessment. The\nRevenue is not permitted to re-characterize a past receipt as\nincome of a later year, nor can it disturb the accepted nature of\nearlier-year transactions without

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

carried forward from earlier years,\nincluding opening balances or credits already recorded and\nacted upon in prior assessments, cannot be taxed again in a\nsubsequent year without reopening the earlier assessment. The\nRevenue is not permitted to re-characterize a past receipt as\nincome of a later year, nor can it disturb the accepted nature of\nearlier-year transactions without

M/S KARNATAKA FRANSALIAN SOCIETY,BANGALORE vs. DDIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T.A No.972/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Karnataka Fransalian Society, “Vinayalaya”, P. B. No.5557, Malleswaram West, Bangalore 560 084 .. Appellant Pan : Aaatk1206E V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Circle -17(2), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Suresh Muthukrishnan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jcit Heard On : 16.11.2015 Pronounced On : 18.11.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

68,002/-. AO denied the claim for a reason that computation of loss under various heads of income and carry forward of such loss to subsequent assessment years for set off was applicable for only assesses other than those which were covered u/ss.11,12, 13 and Sec.10(23)(c) of the Act. He denied the claim for carry forward

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

carried forward from earlier years,\nincluding opening balances or credits already recorded and\nacted upon in prior assessments, cannot be taxed again in a\nsubsequent year without reopening the earlier assessment. The\nRevenue is not permitted to re-characterize a past receipt as\nincome of a later year, nor can it disturb the accepted nature of\nearlier-year transactions without

M/S. PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NALLUR,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

section 80A[5] of the Act, under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case 5. The learned CIT[A] is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 1,07,308/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 rws 115BBE of the Act under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case

FIBRES & FABRICS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

forward of determined losses for future years. 17. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We shall first deal with the grounds challenging the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill. 18. From a perusal of the assessment order, it is clear that the AO denied the benefit of depreciation on goodwill on two grounds; (i) goodwill

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

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

carry out thorough investigations. But if the Assessing Officer fails to unearth any wrong or illegal dealings, he cannot obdurately adhere to his suspicions and treat the subscribed capital as the undisclosed income of the Company. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 16. In this analysis, a distillation of the precedents yields the following propositions of law in the context of Section

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

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

carry out thorough investigations. But if the Assessing Officer fails to unearth any wrong or illegal dealings, he cannot obdurately adhere to his suspicions and treat the subscribed capital as the undisclosed income of the Company. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 16. In this analysis, a distillation of the precedents yields the following propositions of law in the context of Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), BENGALURU vs. M/S SNOWSHINE REALTORS PVT.LTD. , BENGALURU

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

carry out thorough investigations. But if the Assessing Officer fails to unearth any wrong or illegal dealings, he cannot obdurately adhere to his suspicions and treat the subscribed capital as the undisclosed income of the Company. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 16. In this analysis, a distillation of the precedents yields the following propositions of law in the context of Section

M/S SHILPA MEDICARE LTD.,,RAICHUR vs. ADDL.C.I.T., RAICHUR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

section 10B of the I.T. Act. As per the details furnished by the assessee, the profits of the 100% EOU for the current year after set off of losses works out as under: A.Y. 2008-09: Unabsorbed depreciation to be Rs. 3,80,21,039/- carried forward A.Y. 2009-10: Net loss claimed Rs. 27,44,49,575/- Total loss

ASST.C.I.T., RAICHUR vs. M/S SHILPA MEDICARE LTD.,, RAICHUR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

section 10B of the I.T. Act. As per the details furnished by the assessee, the profits of the 100% EOU for the current year after set off of losses works out as under: A.Y. 2008-09: Unabsorbed depreciation to be Rs. 3,80,21,039/- carried forward A.Y. 2009-10: Net loss claimed Rs. 27,44,49,575/- Total loss

ASST.C.I.T., RAICHUR vs. M/S SHILPA MEDICARE LTD.,, RAICHUR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

section 10B of the I.T. Act. As per the details furnished by the assessee, the profits of the 100% EOU for the current year after set off of losses works out as under: A.Y. 2008-09: Unabsorbed depreciation to be Rs. 3,80,21,039/- carried forward A.Y. 2009-10: Net loss claimed Rs. 27,44,49,575/- Total loss

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S CORE OBJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove and appeal filed by revenue stands allowed partly

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.517/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11

forward of the loss under the head 'Income from other Sources' amounting to Rs. 2, 16,017 for set off against income in subsequent years. 3. Interest under section 234B The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 8,802,484. 4. Interest under section 234C The learned AO has erred

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

68,380/-), in respect of the forward contracts entered into by it, on account of fluctuation of foreign currency. The assessee claimed the loss as a deduction. ITA Nos.1980 to 1982/Bang/2018 M/s. Harman Connected Services Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 38 5. The ld. CIT(A) has observed that a perusal of the details filed

M/S HARMAN CONNECTED SERVICES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

68,380/-), in respect of the forward contracts entered into by it, on account of fluctuation of foreign currency. The assessee claimed the loss as a deduction. ITA Nos.1980 to 1982/Bang/2018 M/s. Harman Connected Services Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 38 5. The ld. CIT(A) has observed that a perusal of the details filed