THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

block assessment under Section 158BD in case of the person other than the searched person as two years from the end of the month in which the notice under this Chapter was served on such other person in respect of search carried on after January 1, 1997. The said section does neither provide for nor impose any restrictions or conditions

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

block assessment. 35. It is also trite that while interpreting a machinery provision, the courts would interpret a provision in such a way that it would give meaning to the charging provisions and that the machinery provisions are liberally construed by the courts. In Mahim Patram 47 Private Ltd. v. Union of India

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

block assessment. 35. It is also trite that while interpreting a machinery provision, the courts would interpret a provision in such a way that it would give meaning to the charging provisions and that the machinery provisions are liberally construed by the courts. In Mahim Patram Private Ltd. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., (2007) 3 SCC 668 this

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

68,251/- made on account of capital gains. During the previous year relevant to AY 2017-18, a partnership firm namely M/s. Perpetual Investments, was converted into a private company [the assessee]. The said conversion entailed the transfer of the entire assets and liabilities from the partnership firm to the assessee company. Whereas the assessee claimed that the conversion

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI N LEELA KUMAR

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

assessment under section 143 includes determination of income under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1B) of section 143.. (2) In computing the undisclosed income of the block period, the provisions of sections 68

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GULBARGA vs. M/S MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,N.KUMAR

blocks. It is also engaged in the business of dealing in import of ceramic tiles. Return of income for the assessment year 2003-04 was filed on 28.11.2003 declaring a total income of Rs.3,62,590/-. For the assessment year 2004-05 the return was filed on 29.10.2004 declaring the total income of Rs.4,78,649/-. The returns were processed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KENNAMETAL INC,USA

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I. SANMATHI, SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL) AND: 1. M/S. UNITED SPIRITS LTD., UB TOWERS, No.24, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

M/S. KARNATAKA FINANCIAL SERVICES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

block assessment order was within the period of limitation. The revenue had challenged the aforesaid order in an appeal before this court viz., I.T.A.No.146/2004 to the extent it was decided against the revenue. It is further submitted that this court remanded the matter to the tribunal to adjudicate the issue only to decide the same in accordance with

M/S SUBEX LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III,

In the result, appeal is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

block period. We, thus, - 19 - answer question No. 1 in favour of the assessee holding that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of Section 35D for the Assessments Years in question.” 11. In the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-1 V/s. Deep Industries Ltd., [(2016) 67 taxmann.com 6 (Gujarat)], the High Court of Gujarat, while considering

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

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

blocks, i.e. the assessment year or financial year, the Assessee would be entitled to the benefit of Section 80JJ-AA I.T.A. NO.141 OF 2020 c/w I.T.A. NO.151 OF 2020 57 in the next assessment year and so on so forthwith for a period of three years. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, having held to that effect, in our considered opinion

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

68. What follows is, if the provisions contained in Section 90 is more beneficial to the assessee as compared to the - 85 - terms in the agreement by India with the Government of any country outside India then, notwithstanding such agreement, the provisions of the Act to the extent they are beneficial to that assesseee apply. The benefit claimed

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

68. What follows is, if the provisions contained in Section 90 is more beneficial to the assessee as compared to the - 85 - terms in the agreement by India with the Government of any country outside India then, notwithstanding such agreement, the provisions of the Act to the extent they are beneficial to that assesseee apply. The benefit claimed

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KANSUR DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU -560 009, PAN: AACCK 9866F. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G.S. NAGHARISH.,ADVOCATE) THIS ITA / INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED ABOVE, ALLOW THE Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

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)

BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.R.INDRAKUMAR, ADV. FOR R-2 & R-3 SRI.M.V.SHESHACHALA, CGC, FOR R-3 SRI.Y.HARIPRASAD, CGC FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE SECTION

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Block, Bangalore – 560 095. …Respondents (By Mr. Aravind K.V. Advocate) R Date of Judgment :23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.512/2017 M/s. Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, & Anr. 2/86 This I.T.A. is filed under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act 1961, praying to: 1. Formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein. 2. Allow

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI S RUDRAMUNIYAPPA

Appeals are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Ravi Malimath & The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.S.Dinesh Kumar

block assessment, the assessees were called upon to furnish details with regard to purchase of a Santro Car bearing No.KA-04 MA-9549 registered on 24.05.2000. The : 9 : assessee claimed that the said car belonged to his brother S.Somashekharappa. Thus the statement of the assessee completely corroborated the department’s claim that transactions recorded in the loose sheets were true

M/S ANS CONSTRUCTIONS LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL

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

BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560034 REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI FAYAZ KAMALUDDIN S/O LATE K.P.KAMALUDDIN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS ... PETITIONER [BY SMT.VANI H., ADV.] AND: 1 . ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES ZONE –II, 6TH FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA - 1, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560009 2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, AUDIT - 4.5, DVO – 4, ROOM No.204, 2ND FLOOR, VTK - 2, KORAMANGALA

SRI G LALANATHA REDDY vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: D K SINGH,VENKATESH NAIK T

68 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 71 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 177 OF 2022 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2022 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 305 OF 2022 IN ITA No. 178/2022: BETWEEN: 1. SRI G LALANATHA REDDY AGED 45 YEARS