PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. M/S JEANS KNIT PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find any

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 10B of the Act. 5. The Assessing Officer inter alia held that assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 10B of the Act only after verification and the contention of the assessee that old machinery from FFIPL was transferred to it only in April 2007 does not deserve acceptance

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. TRIDENT MINERALS (100% EOU)

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD,B.VEERAPPA

disallowance of excess profits amounting to Rs.4,76,52,385/- due to transactions with sister concerns from computation of the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act, was withdrawn by the assessee, when actually it was not so. 2

BIOCON LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY

In the result, the impugned order dated 30

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

disallowance. It is further submitted that Section 14A applies only to exempt incomes and since Section 10B of the Act is not an exemption provision as has been held by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. YOKOGAWA LIMITED, supra, the aforesaid provision does not apply to the fact situation of the case. In support of aforesaid submission, reliance has been

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SYNGENE

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

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowance of claim under Section 10B even when the assessee has not satisfied the requirements of said provision to claim deduction under Section 10B as the assessee was not involved in 3 manufacturing activity and was formed by splitting up of existing company? 2

SAINT GOBAIN CRYSTALS & DETECTORS (I) LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order of the tribunal insofar as

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed the claim of deduction under Section 10B of the Act inter alia on the ground that in respect of Unit Nos.1 and 2

M/S GRANITE MART LIMITED vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

In the result the order passed by the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the appellant. The Assessing Officer allowed the deduction under Section 10B of the Act only to the extent of direct export made by the appellant and disallowed

M/S METRIX PRECISION COMPONENTS PVT. LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed the claim of deduction of the assessee under Section 10B of the Act. 3. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by an order dated 20.09.2012 inter alia held that the assessee has not satisfied the conditions required for claiming deduction under Section 10B

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

disallowance was founded on the proviso to Section 92C(4) of the Act. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36360-DB ITA No. 107 of 2025 C/W ITA No. 106 of 2025 17. It is material to note that the TP adjustments are made pursuant to the APA entered into by the Assessee with CBDT. Section 92CC

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT (A) vs. M/S. LAKSHMINARAYANA MINING COMPANY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

disallowed or restricted merely on the ground that certain plant and machinery is situated outside the 7 ‘bonded area’ and as the assessee is an exporter and not an importer in terms of the Notification under 54/1997 dated 3.6.1997 issued under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act which provides that custom bonding is required only where imports are contemplated

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S MPHASIS SOFTWARE AND SERVICES

The appeals stand dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and allowed the claim of the assessee and granted benefit under 4 Section 10A for the ‘on-site’ work carried out by the assessee through its sub-contractor i.e., AE. Aggrieved by the said order, these appeals have been filed, which have been admitted

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MOTOROLA INDIA ELECTRONICS (P) LTD

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

10B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity). - 3 - 2. The assessee had earned interest from the following sources:- 1. Deposits lying in the EEFC account and 2. Advancing of inter-corporate loans out of the funds of the undertaking. The assessee had outstanding borrowings by way of External Commercial Borrowings (ECBs in short

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MPHASIS LTD

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

10B deduction by following the decision of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT v/s Tata Elxsi and even when the recomputation done by the assessing authority is in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 8. It is submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside the disallowance of depreciation @ 60% on switches and routers amounting

SMT. PUNEETHA @ PUNEETHA B. A. vs. SRI. D. RAVI

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: R DEVDAS

10B deduction by following the decision of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT v/s Tata Elxsi and even when the recomputation done by the assessing authority is in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 8. It is submitted that the Tribunal erred in setting aside the disallowance of depreciation @ 60% on switches and routers amounting

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S L.G SOFT INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed off accordingly

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

2)(ii) of the Act with the organizational change in the company. Under the circumstances, grant of relief under Section 10A of the Act to the assessee is erroneous and that the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal are erroneous. Hence, he pleads that the question of law be answered in favour of the Revenue

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S L.G SOFT INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed off accordingly

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

2)(ii) of the Act with the organizational change in the company. Under the circumstances, grant of relief under Section 10A of the Act to the assessee is erroneous and that the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal are erroneous. Hence, he pleads that the question of law be answered in favour of the Revenue

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI vs. M/S SAINT GOBAIN CRYSTALS

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

2 - This ITA is filed Under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act 1961, arising out of order dated 19/02/2016 passed in ITA No.54/Bang/2015, for the Assessment Year 2009-2010 praying to (a) decide the foregoing question of law and/or such other questions of law as may be formulated by the Hon'ble Court as deemed fit, (b) set aside