M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

80P, Doddakannelli, Sarjapur Road, Bangalore-560035. ...APPELLANT (By Sri Venkataraman, Senior Counsel for Dr.R.B.Krishna, Adv.) AND : The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(3), 3rd Floor, Central Revenue Buildings, Queens Road, Bangalore-560001. …RESPONDENT (By Sri E.R.Indrakumar, Senior Counsel for Sri K.V.Aravind, Adv.) This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

80P, Doddakannelli, Sarjapur Road, Bangalore-560035. ...APPELLANT (By Sri Venkataraman, Senior Counsel for Dr.R.B.Krishna, Adv.) AND : The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(3), 3rd Floor, Central Revenue Buildings, Queens Road, Bangalore-560001. …RESPONDENT (By Sri E.R.Indrakumar, Senior Counsel for Sri K.V.Aravind, Adv.) This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260-A of I.T.Act, 1961 arising out of order

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

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: The Commissioner Of

D : 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 3RD FLOOR, PHIROZ KHIMJI COMPLEX, OPP.CIVIL HOSPITAL, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM-590001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (2), OPP.CIVIL HOSPITAL, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2) 2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL

PATIL CONSTRUCTION INFRASTRUCTURE vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly

Bench: The Commissioner Of

D : 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), 3RD FLOOR, PHIROZ KHIMJI COMPLEX, OPP.CIVIL HOSPITAL, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM-590001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (2), OPP.CIVIL HOSPITAL, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2) 2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL

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.

D : M/S BAPOOJI PATTIN SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT, SECTOR NO.25, NAVANAGAR, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT. PAN: AAAAB6930F. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI.SANGRAM S.KULKARNI, ADV.) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU IN ITA No.1130/BANG/2015 DATED 28.12.2015 AND CONFIRM

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

Accordingly, the petition is allowed in

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

D E R Heard the learned Senior Advocate Shri K P Kumar appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the revenue Shri K V Aravind. 2. The petitioner’s regular assessments was concluded by assessment order dated 09.03.2011 for the year 2009-10. Subsequently, the first respondent is said to have issued notice under Section 148 proposing

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

CORPORATION BANK vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

D E R Heard the learned Senior Advocate Shri K P Kumar appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the revenue Shri K V Aravind. 2. These petitions are disposed of by this common order. The petitioners’ regular assessments were concluded by assessment orders dated 08.02.2012 and 21.03.2011 for 4 the years

CORPORATION BANK vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy

D E R Heard the learned Senior Advocate Shri K P Kumar appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the revenue Shri K V Aravind. 2. These petitions are disposed of by this common order. The petitioners’ regular assessments were concluded by assessment orders dated 08.02.2012 and 21.03.2011 for 4 the years

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MOODBIDRI CO OPERATIVE SERVICES BANK LTD.,

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,G BASAVARAJA

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the 1961 Act has been revived by setting aside the revisional order made by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. 2. Learned Sr. panel Counsel appearing for the Revenue has framed the following substantial questions of law which read as under: “1. Whether the Hon’ble ITAT is correct in considering the interest received