BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Appeal is allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,UMESH M ADIGA

115 OF 2017 BETWEEN: BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 ADMINISTRATION BLOCK BIAL, DEVANAHALLI BANGALORE-560 300. REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS MR. AKSHAY RAM APTE …APPELLANT (BY SHRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-11(2) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU vs. M/S. CANARA BANK

The appeal stands disposed of as

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Depreciation on assets leased to others under the provisions of the Act? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside that the provisions of Section 115JB are not applicable to banking companies as no accounts are drawn up as per the requirement of Schedule

M/S ING VYSYA BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result appeal fails and it is hereby

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,AJIT J GUNJAL

depreciation on the leased assets as an operating lease and as such the assessee apparently sought benefits under both forms of the lease which was impermissible in law resulting in evasion of income and tax. This fact was noticed by assessing officer after completion of the assessment for - 12 - the assessment years upto 1997-98 and brought

THE COMMISSIONER vs. M/S VIJAYA BANK

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

115 JB of the Act, the tax was computed at Rs.12,60,62,901/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and Notices under Section 143(2) of the Act were issued on 05.09.2008 and 26.09.2008. The Assessing Officer by order dated 09.12.2009 inter alia disallowed the deduction of Rs.20,00,00,000/- claimed under Section 36(1)(viii

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

depreciation of Rs.84,39,457/- in all a sum of Rs.8,63,61,817/- towards Helicopters. On 31.03.2013, the assessment order held that there was a report that the assessee was involved in political activity. The Helicopter was used for political purposes as per media report. The claim was considered by the Assessing Officer under Section

THE COMMISSIONER vs. M/S CANARA BANK

In the result, the appeal stands disposed of in terms of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

115 7 taxmann.Com 287(Karnataka) has considered the identical issue and has held as under:- "9. From perusal of Section 14A of the Act, it is evident that for the purposes of computing the total income under this chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation of the income which does

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ING VYSYA BANK LTD

In the result, these appeals fail and are

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

depreciation, if any, is to be provided and allowed for in the account? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in concluding that banking companies are exempt from MAT provisions even when there is no specific exemption for the banking companies in the provisions of section 115

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ING VYSYA BANK LTD

In the result, these appeals fail and are

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

depreciation, if any, is to be provided and allowed for in the account? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in concluding that banking companies are exempt from MAT provisions even when there is no specific exemption for the banking companies in the provisions of section 115

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ING VYSYA BANK LTD

In the result, these appeals fail and are

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

depreciation, if any, is to be provided and allowed for in the account? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in concluding that banking companies are exempt from MAT provisions even when there is no specific exemption for the banking companies in the provisions of section 115

M/S KILARA POWER PVT. LTD., vs. THE INCOME -TAX OFFICER

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

115 JB to the case of the Appellant Rs.3,59,58,370/- is to be reduced from the book profit in full? (ii) In the alternative and without prejudice in the event that the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether on the facts and in the 3 circumstances while applying u/s 115JB to the case

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

M/S INDUS TOWERS LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

In the result, we pass the following order:

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,N.KUMAR

depreciation, it ‘crms (a i’s that t’it 9rc,cg3dure (icOptLd his hit ir.t o,nc un rlcpriruneru ftt i xtzirurj .zn)qr “LUU’V 1.4 .Ji,_. j%; c ‘ iion l.eu GIL u_’ ic’,S;, citLd 11W’ Lfl%i t Oil the. utaN” ii-Le ii i tqitally