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

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

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

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

disallowance of foreign exchange loss on forward contract. 13 15. Learned counsel for the revenue has argued before this Court that such loss is a notional and contingent and has to be treated as speculative loss in terms of Section 43(5) of the Income tax Act. He has also argued before this Court that the Tribunal without examining

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

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: R DEVDAS

disallowance of foreign exchange loss on forward contract. 13 15. Learned counsel for the revenue has argued before this Court that such loss is a notional and contingent and has to be treated as speculative loss in terms of Section 43(5) of the Income tax Act. He has also argued before this Court that the Tribunal without examining

M/S. KARNATAKA INSTRADE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

145 of the Act. 3. In pursuance of the notice issued, the authorized representative of the assessee filed his reply contending that though the assessee-Company entered into an agreement dated 25-08-1999 with the MCL, the physical possession was handed over during the financial year 2000-01 relevant to assessment year 2001-02. The agreement of sale contains

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

2(24) of the Act as the assessee merely acted in a fiduciary capacity for collection and disposal of the amount of PSF-(SC). 20. As aforesaid, the dispute herein is in a narrow compass with reference to 2.5% of PSF withheld by the Airlines Operators in terms of clause 1.4 of SOP. It is trite that no denial

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. INDUS FILA LTD

In the result, the order passed by the Income Tax

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that assessee is in the business of manufacturing ready made garments. The assessee filed the return of income on 31.03.2009 for Assessment Year 4 2008-09 declaring income as ‘NIL’ after setting off, of loss of Rs.31,36,33,145/- in respect of M/s Tulip Apparels Private Limited

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S SHRIRAM CHITS (KAR) PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowance of bad debts written off while such issue in the assessee's own case was remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer by the Hon'ble High Court in the A.Y. 1998-99 3 with a direction to reconsider the issue in the light of provision of section 145(1)/(2

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

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

disallowed? (ii) Whether the provisions of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules should be made applicable to all pending matters as the same is clarifactory in nature in view of the consistent stands taken by the department? (iii) Whether the tribunal was correct in holding that the estimated expenditure cannot be treated

TATA COFFEE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the same fails and is hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

2) of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer by an order dated 30.11.2007 disallowed claims viz., treating the income on sale of shade trees as business income and not a capital asset, disallowance of claim under Section 14A, disallowance of expenses in marketing division, adhoc disallowance of miscellaneous expenses at Toopran division and disallowance of entertainment expenses

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ENNOBLE CONSTRUCTION

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,P.KRISHNA BHAT

2. The Revenue in its Memorandum of Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘1961 Act’) had framed the following question, as the substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in setting aside the disallowance of Rs.5,89,49,503/- claimed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) vs. M/S COFFEEDAY ENTERPRISES LTD

Appeal is dismissed; and

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.10.2020 PASSED IN ITA NO.459/BANG/2020, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - ITA No. 145 of 2021 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S DAVANGERE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK

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

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

2. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the provision for non performing assets made by assessee is proper as it is done as per RBI guidelines without appreciating that RBI guidelines cannot override the mandatory provision of section 145 of the I.T.Act which is a specific provision dealing with