COFFEEDAY GLOBAL LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the orders dated 21

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

disallowed. It is also argued that the tribunal while passing the order dated 06.12.2017 has rectified the errors, which were apparent on the record. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'CIT VS. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.', (2019) 102 TAXMANN.COM 52(SC), 'CIT VS. 15 RELIANCE UTILITIES & POWER LTD', (2009) 178 TAXMAN 135 (BOMBAY

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A) vs. M/S. ADVAITH MOTORS PVT LTD.,

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

135/-. The question whether disallowance in terms of Section 14A of the Act r/w 8D of the Rules could exceed

M/S KHODAY INDIA LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

135 (BOM.) and 'CIT VS. HDFC BANK LTD.', (2014) 49 TAXMANN.COM 355 (BOM.). 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that condition for recording satisfaction as prescribed under Section 14A of the Act is not attracted to the facts of the case as there is no suo motu disallowance

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ASEA BROWN BOVERI LTD

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

disallowance of claim under Section 40(A)(3) of the Act was also upheld. The finding with regard to allowing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act was upheld. In the result, the appeal was dismissed. 9 4. The assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The tribunal by an order dated 25.05.2012 inter alia held that

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

disallowed the same holding that the assessee had not established the nexus for utilization of the funds raised in FNCR are used for the business purposes. It was assumed by the Assessing Officer that the loan had been used for certain investments into share capital of various companies. The same has been confirmed by the CIT - 10 - (A). The Tribunal

CHITTHARANJAN A DASANNACHARYA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed. The assessee thereupon approached the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who by an order dated 31.10.2011 dismissed the appeal on merits. However, the interest levied under Section 234B of the Act was set aside. The assessee as well as the revenue filed the appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GARNIWAL EXPORTS (P) LTD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA

disallowed the deduction claimed in respect of the price of Rs.17,78,155/- received by the assessee by way of transfer of quota opining that the amount represented business income of the assessee; that it cannot be attributed to any export activity as the amount is not by export but received 4 within the country; that Section 80HHC benefit being

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

135): “The Revenue had the option, but did not take recourse to Section 263 of the Act, inspite of audit objection. Supervisory and revisionary power under Section 263 of the Act is available, if an order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. An erroneous order contrary to law that has caused

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SRI ADICHUNCHUNAGIRI SHIKSHANA TRUST

In the result, all the appeals are

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA REDDY JANASANGHA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL)

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. AL-AMEEN CHARITABLE FUND TRUST

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI ADICHUNCHUNGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

disallowance of depreciation, the assessee preferred appeals which were allowed in favour of the assessee. Revenue challenged the said orders of the CIT(Appeals) before the Tribunal unsuccessfully. The orders passed by the Tribunal are challenged in these appeals. 8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby

TTK PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Appeals are allowed

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

135, BRIGADE ROAD BANGALORE-560 025 …APPELLANT (BY DR. R.B. KRISHNA ADVOCATE) [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] AND : THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BMTC BUILDING 2ND FLOOR, ROOM No. 240 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095 …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) . . . . THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING

TTK PRESTIGE LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Appeals are allowed

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

135, BRIGADE ROAD BANGALORE-560 025 …APPELLANT (BY DR. R.B. KRISHNA ADVOCATE) [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] AND : THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 7(1)(1), BMTC BUILDING 2ND FLOOR, ROOM No. 240 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095 …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) . . . . THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ARISING