MADHU SOUHARDA PATHINA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

disallowance of deduction under Section 80P of the Act, on the ground of non-filing of return of income, can be made only by invoking Section 80AC of the Act. However, Section 80AC has been made applicable to Section 80P of the Act by the Finance Act, 2018 with effect from 01.04.2018, i.e., from the Assessment Year 2018–19. Since

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INDIA PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowance of Rs.7,57,22,069 made under section 80JJAA of the Act by holding that the employees in software industry are covered by definition of ‘Workman’ in Explanation (iii) to section 80JJAA of the Act read with

BELLADBAGEWADIKRISHISEVA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeals are allowed

Bench: JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA,S.SUJATHA

1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the Appellant is not a Primary Agricultural Credit Society when the same is not disputed by the Revenue before the 1st Appellate Authority or before the Assessment Officer? 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. THE TOTAGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY,

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR,RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN

disallowed ostensibly on the ground that the said amount of income was earned by the assessee in the form of interest from deposits in the Co- operative Banks. Thus it should be brought to tax under the head “other sources”. Therefore, the assessee was not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, on this count. Therefore

SRI.BAPOOJI PATTIN SOUHARD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

Appeal is dismissed confirming the order passed by the

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

disallowing Pigmi commission on the ground that no TDS was made of Rs.1,70,46,946/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer denied the exemption under Section 80P of the Act on the ground that the Assessee – Society is a Bank and is hit by the provisions of Sub-Section (4) of Section 80P of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved

THE COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND ANR vs. THE BIJAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL

Bench: R.DEVDAS,VINEET KOTHARI

disallowance of such interest paid to the members without TDS, was liable to be made as per the provisions of Section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act. 4. Both the learned counsel at Bar fairly submitted that the said issue is no longer res-integra in view of the CBTD Circular No.19/2015 holding that such Co-operative Banks

M/S THE TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD., vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, we pass the following:

Bench: B.S PATIL,P.S.DINESH KUMAR

disallowed the exemption under Section 80P(1)(i). He submits that in view of the fact that the issue has been

LOKMANYA MULTIPURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: The Commissioner Of

1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and the case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was concluded disallowing the deduction under Section 80P

PATIL CONSTRUCTION INFRASTRUCTURE vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: The Commissioner Of

1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and the case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was concluded disallowing the deduction under Section 80P

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. KURUHINSHETTY URBAN CO-OP

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: H.BILLAPPA,P.S.DINESH KUMAR

1. Whether the Tribunal was right in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in not appreciating that the respondent assessee society being a credit co-operative society engaged in banking business is a Primary Co-operative Bank within the definition of Section 5(cci) read with section 5(ccv) of the Banking Regulation

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S BAPOOJI PATTIN

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Which Came To Be Allowed. Aggrieved By The Same, An Appeal Was Preferred By The Revenue Before The Itat. The Itat Dismissed The Same.

1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and the case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was concluded disallowing the deduction under Section 80P

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

SHREE SIDDESHWAR SOUHARDHANA, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Ravi Malimath & The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice G.Narendar

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). During the assessment proceedings, it was noticed that the appellant had invested its surplus in Bilagi Sugar Mills Ltd., Badagandi and Bilagi Pattana Sahakari Bank, Bilagi. The interest earned on these investments was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. He held that the assessee had invested

BANNANJE GRAHAKARA VIVIDHODDESHA SAHARAKA SANGHA LTD., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

The appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI - 110001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 & TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MALPE ROAD, ADI-UDUPI, UDUPI - 576103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. THIRUMALESH, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL) Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.315 OF 2012 BETWEEN: M/S. WIPRO LIMITED 76R & 80P, DODDAKANNELLI SARJAPUR ROAD BENGALURU-560035 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. GANESH, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL

CORPORATION BANK vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

disallowed u/s 57(i) of the Act as interest on non-SLR securities is income from other sources.” 2. Clause (id) of sub-section (1) of Section 56 of the Act provides that income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Income from Other Sources”, if, the income is not chargeable

CORPORATION BANK vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

disallowed u/s 57(i) of the Act as interest on non-SLR securities is income from other sources.” 2. Clause (id) of sub-section (1) of Section 56 of the Act provides that income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Income from Other Sources”, if, the income is not chargeable

KARNATAKA BANK LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX

Accordingly, the petition is allowed in

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

disallowed u/s 57(i) of the Act as interest on 5 non-SLR securities is income from other sources.” 2. Clause (id) of sub-section (1) of Section 56 of the Act provides that income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Income from Other Sources”, if, the income is not chargeable