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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

transfer of the reserves and surplus to the holding company by avoiding the payment of tax and therefore it will be treated as a colourable device. There are two aspects in this transaction- (i) It is a simple and plain transaction of buy back of shares without having any dispute of price then the same is beyond the scope

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

71 (PC), it has been held under the erstwhile Income Tax Act, 1922 that the word ‘assessment’ is not confined to the definite act of making an order of assessment; in C.A. Abraham v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 425 (SC), in the context of section 44 of 1922 Act (similar to section 189 of the 1961 Act), it has been

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price. As per the return filed the tax payable was Rs.48,38,27,302/-. The assessee also claimed TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arms’ length price. As per the return filed the tax payable was Rs.48,38,27,302/-. The assessee also claimed TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed

R JANARDHANA BABU vs. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

71 further contended that each of the petitioners/workmen have opted for voluntary retirement scheme and received benefits extended under the said scheme and were relieved from service. It was contended that each of the petitioners having availed voluntary retirement scheme and received terminal benefits including voluntary retirement scheme benefits will not be a ‘workman’ within the meaning of Section 2

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT SAROJINI M KUSHE

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

71,275/- on account of the capital gain. 4. The assessee had entered into a Joint Development Agreement (‘JDA’ for short) with M/s R&S Turnkey Contractors Private Limited for development of 84 cents of land. As per the JDA dated 21.10.2010, the - 4 - assessee was entitled to 30% of the total saleable super built up area. In the supplementary

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ING VYSYA BANK LTD

In the result, this appeal is allowed in part,

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

71,030/- and the balance claim of Rs.5,24,74,740/- had been correctly disallowed as the requirement of Section 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(vii-a) had not been complied with by the assessee. (4) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the Assessing Officer had correctly disallowed the claim made by the assessee regarding entertainment expenditure

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PVT LTD

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice V. Srishananda Civil Revision Petition No.29/2019 Between

price realized by sale of flats.  The further observation of civil court that the observation of arbitrator about the firm being not impleaded in proceedings is questioned by Petitioner is unsustainable in law. There is no dispute between the firm and the partners. A firm is only a compendious name of all the partners. When all the partners

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS

Appeal is dismissed with costs

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.S.A.No.70/2007

71 72. Thus, the focal point of the suit would be the execution of sale deed by MMe Devika Rani Roerich on 16-02-1992 which is marked as Ex.P1 before the trial court. 73. The term ‘Sale’ is defined under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, as under: “Sale” defined.—‘‘Sale” is a transfer of ownership

MR. BINEESH KODIYERI vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj Writ Petition No. 13261 Of 2020 (Gm-Res) Between: Mr. Bineesh Kodiyeri S/O Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan Aged About 37 Years Kootamvilla Lane, Maruthankuzhi Thiruvananthapuram District Kerala State – 695013

price of which exceeds on e crore rupees; or (d) Fraudulently availing of or attempt to avail of drawback or any exemption from duty provided under this Act, if the amount of drawback or exemption from duty exceeds fifty lakh rupees. WP No. 13261 of 2020 65 (7) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (6), all other offences under

M/S. BMM ISPAT LTD vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

IRON ORE END USERS ASSOCIATION vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

M/S PADMAVATHI FERROUS LTD vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

M/S ELECTROTHERM (INDIA)LTD vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

SATHVAHANA ISPAT LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

M/S JEEVAKA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

M/S S.V.CHETTY IRON ORE MINES vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA

M/S HARE KRISHNA METALICS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

71 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY CIRCLE BELLARY-583 101 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BELLARY DIVISION BELLARY-583 101 5. THE MONITORING COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN-DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, "KHANIJA BHAVAN" RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.S.K.BAGARIA