THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF MYSORE

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

1) or Section 41(4) of the Act. It was further held that disallowance under Section 14A of the Act towards borrowed fund on investment should be restricted to 2% of the interest on tax free bonds. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the disallowance of expenditure incurred on earning the income exempt under Section

KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORTION LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy Writ Petition No.12872 Of 2013 (T-It) Connected With Writ Petition No.14687 Of 2014 (T-It), Writ Petition No.15910 Of 2015 (T-It) & Writ Petition No.17514 Of 2015 (T-It) In W.P.No.12872 Of 2013 Between: Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Represented By It’S Executive Director (Finance), Sri. Shrikant B Vanahalli, Aged About 57 Years, No.78, Seethalakshmi Towers, Mission Road, Bangalore 560 027. …Petitioner

disallowance of privilege fees in the assessment order is in violation of the powers of the State to have its Statute as per Entry 8 of list-II of Seventh Schedule and being within its powers under Article 245(1) and 246(3) of the Constitution of India and etc; These Writ Petitions coming on for orders, this

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE UNION OF INDIA REPTD BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri W.P. No.26037/2005 C/W W.P.No.4464/2007 & W.P.No.27087/2005(It)

246 List I and Entry 17 No.82 deals with Taxes on income other than Agriculture income. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that on perusal of the compilations of various provisions, it is evident that fringe benefits is not included in the definition of income under ‘Sub-section 24 of Section 2 whereas Sub-section 43 relates

M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

246 and 264. The aforesaid Explanation was deleted by Finance Act, 1999 with effect from 01.06.1999. The effect of the deletion is that intimation under Section 143(1) of the 11 Act ceases to be an order for the purposes of Section 264 of the Act. The Supreme Court in RAJESH JHAVERI supra has held that an intimation under Section

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (4) vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Section 24 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 is illegal. 6. The respondent-Company filed respective writ petitions before the learned Single Judge challenging the aforesaid assessment orders for the respective years passed by the Assessment Officer and prayed to declare disallowance of the privilege fee in the assessment year as in violation of the powers of the State

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Section 24 of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 is illegal. 6. The respondent-Company filed respective writ petitions before the learned Single Judge challenging the aforesaid assessment orders for the respective years passed by the Assessment Officer and prayed to declare disallowance of the privilege fee in the assessment year as in violation of the powers of the State

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S BAHUBALI NEMINATH MUTTIN,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

Disallowance under Section 40A (3) of the I.T. Act being undisclosed income Rs.24,216/- (v) Gross profit on suppressed sales being undisclosed income at Rs.19,45,509/- (vi) Addition on account of cessation of liability under Section 41 (1) of the I.T. Act at Rs.2,37,818/-. 3. The assessee had filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. M/S HASSAN HAJEE & CO

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

1) of the income tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal right in law in restricting the addition to 1.6% in 3 respect of wages instead of 10.3% and 6.6% adopted by the assessing authority respectively for the Assessment Years 2002- 03 and 2003-04, when the onus to prove the genuineness

SWARNA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav

1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Aayakar Bhavan, C.R.Building, N.G.Road, Attavara, Mangaluru- 575 001. 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Aayakar Bhavan, Adi-Udupi, Malpe Road, Udupi- 576 103. … Respondents (By Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, Advocate) 2 This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Assessment Order dated 15.12.2019 passed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. HASSAN HAJEE & CO

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

1), Mangalore. 3 This ITA coming up for final hearing, this day, MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR .J., delivered the following. J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed by the Revenue questioning the order dated 30.4.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench ‘A’ in ITA No.947/Bang/08 (Assessment year 2004-05). The appellants have prayed

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI.B.KUMAR GOWDA MINE OWNERS

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,B.A.PATIL

1, BELLARY, REP.BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GULBARGA, AYAKAR BHAVAN SEDAM ROAD, GULBARGA. .. APPELLANT (BY SRI.AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: B.KUMARA GOWDA, MINE OWNERS, BKG HOUSE, K.B.COLONY, SANDUR, BELLARY – 583 101. .. RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHAITHANYA K.K., ADVOCATE) ****** 3 THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE