DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S TECNOTREE CONVERGENCE LTD , GURGAON

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

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

11A) of the Act to allow deduction under section 10A of the Act in respect of export sales proceeds which were received subsequently. Since we have already held earlier in this order (supra) that those export sales proceeds which were realized within the specified time limit ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page

TECNOTREE CONVERGENCE LT D,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

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

11A) of the Act to allow deduction under section 10A of the Act in respect of export sales proceeds which were received subsequently. Since we have already held earlier in this order (supra) that those export sales proceeds which were realized within the specified time limit ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page

TECNOTREE CONVERGENCE LT D,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

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

11A) of the Act to allow deduction under section 10A of the Act in respect of export sales proceeds which were received subsequently. Since we have already held earlier in this order (supra) that those export sales proceeds which were realized within the specified time limit ITA Nos. 1447 and 1448/Bang/2017 ITA Nos. 1519 and 1520/Bang/2017 Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S TATA ELXSI. LTD., BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

68,91,445/- not realized within prescribed time, the ld.CIT(A), referring to the provisions of section 155(11A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S TATA ELXSI. LTD, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

68,91,445/- not realized within prescribed time, the ld.CIT(A), referring to the provisions of section 155(11A

M/S TATA ELXSI LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Tata Elxsi Ltd., Itpb Road, Hoody, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru-560 048. … Appellant Pan:Aaact 7872 Q Vs

68,91,445/- not realized within prescribed time, the ld.CIT(A), referring to the provisions of section 155(11A

VAIDYA SRIKANTAPPA SADASHIVAIAH SRIKANTH,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE- 1, , BANGALORE

11A\nof L.A. Act, 1894 and therefore, the acquisition has lapsed. Also, no\ndeclaration of lapse of acquisition under Section 6 of LA Act, 1894 can be\ngiven to the petitioners in the instant case. Further, no declaration under\nsub-section (2) of Section 24 of 2013 Act, on the premise that the award of\ncompensation

XCHANGING SOLUTIONS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

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

11A) of the Act, as the export proceeds were realized by the IT(TP)A No.492 & 451/B/2015 & 402 & 556/B/2016 Page 3 of 37 Appellant before the completion of assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Non-reduction of telecommunication expenses (reduced from Export turnover) amounting to INR 2,23,44,926 from Total turnover for computing

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S XCHANGING SOLUTIONS LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

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

11A) of the Act, as the export proceeds were realized by the IT(TP)A No.492 & 451/B/2015 & 402 & 556/B/2016 Page 3 of 37 Appellant before the completion of assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Non-reduction of telecommunication expenses (reduced from Export turnover) amounting to INR 2,23,44,926 from Total turnover for computing

ITO, BANGALORE vs. M/S XCHANGING SOLUTIONS LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

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

11A) of the Act, as the export proceeds were realized by the IT(TP)A No.492 & 451/B/2015 & 402 & 556/B/2016 Page 3 of 37 Appellant before the completion of assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Non-reduction of telecommunication expenses (reduced from Export turnover) amounting to INR 2,23,44,926 from Total turnover for computing

XCHANGING SOLUTIONS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

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

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

11A) of the Act, as the export proceeds were realized by the IT(TP)A No.492 & 451/B/2015 & 402 & 556/B/2016 Page 3 of 37 Appellant before the completion of assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Non-reduction of telecommunication expenses (reduced from Export turnover) amounting to INR 2,23,44,926 from Total turnover for computing

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

68,132/-. Thus, the assessee has already got a part relief when its revised return of income was processed. 10.1 During the appellate proceedings the assessee has filed detailed written submissions on the merits of the case. However, the assessee has already filed a revised return of income and the same has already been processed

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

68,132/-. Thus, the assessee has already got a part relief when its revised return of income was processed. 10.1 During the appellate proceedings the assessee has filed detailed written submissions on the merits of the case. However, the assessee has already filed a revised return of income and the same has already been processed