THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD

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

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

201(1) of the I.T. Act holding that services rendered by Abbey UK to Abbey, India are in the nature of Technical Services as per Section 9(i)(vii) Explanation 2 Article 13(4)(c) of the India - UK Double Taxation Agreement (for short DTAA)? 2. The factual background, in which the aforesaid substantial questions of law arise

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation is a statutory deduction available to the assessee on the asset, which is wholly or partly owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business or profession. It is also pointed out that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the tribunal have recorded concurrent findings on the aforesaid issue in favour of the assessee

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation is a statutory deduction available to the assessee on the asset, which is wholly or partly owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business or profession. It is also pointed out that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the tribunal have recorded concurrent findings on the aforesaid issue in favour of the assessee

PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD.,

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation is a statutory deduction available to the assessee on the asset, which is wholly or partly owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business or profession. It is also pointed out that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the tribunal have recorded concurrent findings on the aforesaid issue in favour of the assessee

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

201 ITR 674] had held that the power of the Tribunal under Section 254 of the Act can be exercised only in relation to the grounds raised in the appeal and the Tribunal cannot go beyond the scope of the appeal and decide the question which does not form the subject matter of the appeal. In that case, the Assessee

COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. MANIPAL HOTEL & RESTAURANT

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

201 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) C.R. BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), UDUPI. …APPELLANTS (BY MR.SANMATHI E I, ADV.) AND: MANIPAL HOTEL & RESTAURANT MANAGEMENT COLLEGE TRUST, VALLEY VIEW INTERNATIONAL, MANIPAL-576104. PAN:AAATM2175J …RESPONDENT (BY MR.S.PARTHASARATHI & SMT.SHEETAL BOARKAR, ADVS.) Date of Judgment 14-08-2018 I.T.A.No.201/2015 Commissioner

M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

depreciation under section 32 on repairs and maintenance for AY 2008-09, AY 2009-10 and AY 2010-11?" - 11 - 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside and restoring the issue of disallowance of collection charges under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act pertaining to Passenger Service Fee (Security Component

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

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

1)(vii) of the Act. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee has invited the attention of this court to Section 115JB of the Act, which was amended with effect from 01.04.2013. It is submitted that Section 115JB(2) of the Act as it existed prior to its amendment with effect

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 1 3 i 0 1

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE SECRETARY vs. M/S KARDICOPPAL ESTATE THITHIMATHI

Appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI ADITYA SONDHI, ADDL. AG & SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, GP) AND: SRI. K.V.GANGARAJU 50 YEARS 3 COFFEE PLANTER MADIHALLI ESTATE BHARATHUR POST H. HOSAKOTE HOBLI ALUR TALUK. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MANMOHAN P.N. ADV.) IN WA NO.3323/2004 BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE FINANCE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 1. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER