PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SOFTBRANDS INDIA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Transfer Pricing Adjustments in the declared profits of the Assessee, but a flood of such appeals go before the Tribunal itself where finally the inclusion or exclusion Date of Judgment 25-06-2018 I.T.A.No.536/2015 C/w I.T.A.No.537/2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Softbrands India P. Ltd., 58/80 of comparables has been determined by the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX-6 vs. M R KODANDRAM

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer: Provided …..” Section 50D of the Act reads thus; “Fair market value deemed to be full value of consideration in certain cases. 50D. Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of a capital asset

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer: Provided …..” Section 50D of the Act reads thus; - 11 - “Fair market value deemed to be full value of consideration in certain cases. 50D. Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of a capital asset

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SHASTHA PHARMA LABORATORIES

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

price of Rs.50.12/- lakhs did not amount to a transfer and consequently, no capital gains tax was liable to be paid.?” 7. However, before commencement of the arguments, learned Counsel for the revenue sought the permission of the Court to raise additional substantial question of law : “Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding the reopening of assessment under Sections

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

Section 10AA of the Act. In addition, the Assessee had also claimed deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Act. Immediately after filing its original return for AY 2015-16, the Assessee had filed a revised return voluntarily declaring transfer pricing [TP] adjustments of ₹14,82,00,000/-, which was reworked

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:

Transfer Pricing Adjustment constitutes a fresh assessment; as a 47 corollary of that, the balance portion of the order which otherwise warranted giving effect to the ITAT order, does not amount to a fresh assessment or reassessment; both the TPA and the other substantial portion of giving effect were completed by one order giving effect to ITAT, dated

SMT DURGA KUMARI BOBBA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Appeal is allowed in

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

transfer nor as cost of acquisition, the only two contingencies which can be considered while allowing deduction. The tax component does not fall within the definition of Section 48(1) of the Act; • that the tax paid by the company is not allowed as deduction. By the same analogy, deduction 5 cannot be allowed in the hands of the appellant

SATISH KUMAR PANDEY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

section 48(1) reflects that there should be a causal connect and the expenditure incurred to be allowed as a deduction must be united or in the state of being united with the transfer of the capital asset resulting in income by way of capital gains on which tax has to be paid. The expenditure, therefore, should have direct connection

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC AND ELCTRICAL

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

transfer; (ii) the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto;” 13. Section 55[2] of the Act reads thus: “55. Meaning of ‘adjusted’, ‘cost of improvement’ and ‘cost of acquisition’ (1) xxx xxx xxx (2) For the purposes of sections 48 and 49, “cost of acquisition” - 18 (a) in relation to a capital asset

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

48. Now the next aspect that has come up for consideration before this Court in this case is regarding the registration and consequences of refusal to register. In this connection, Sections 73, 74 and 75 49 of the Indian Registration Act, indicate the formalities. 49. When the execution is denied by the seller after completing formalities of execution

M/S SYSARRIS SOFTWARE PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: A Learned Single Judge Of This Court By Filing A Writ Petition On The Premise That There Was No Tangible Or Credible Information With The Assessing Officer Before Issuing The Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act.

48 YEARS) … APPELLANT [By Sri Chythanya K K, Adv.] AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 12(3) BENGALURU 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TRANSFER PRICING - V BENGALURU 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 TRANSFER PRINCING - VI BENGALURU … RESPONDENTS [By Sri K V Aravind, Adv. for Sri M V Seshachala, Adv.] THIS APPEAL

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.SAMPANGIRAMAIAH

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

48 YEARS, R/O NO.1399, 12-B, CROSS ROAD, II STAGE, BASAVESWARANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 096. ...CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI.JAYAKUMAR S PATIL., SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI.H N BASAVARAJU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . M/S SUN RAMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT,1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SANJAY PLAZA,6TH FLOOR, A.B.NAIR ROAD, JUHU, MUMBAI-400049. REPRESENTED HEREIN

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. VIKRAM REDDY

In the result, the fifth substantial question of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

48. The income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" shall be computed, by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, namely :— (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer; 19 (ii) the cost of acquisition of the asset

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to follow the directions given by the tribunal in earlier Assessment Year. The tribunal with regard to claim of assessee under Section 14A of the Act directed the Assessing Officer to follow the directions given the claim of the assessee under Section 14A of the Act set aside the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer

M/S SREE JAYALAKSHMI TEXTILES vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION

Bench: The Date Fixed For Sale Of Transfer & In Such Event The Secured Asset Shall Not Be Sold & That Once The Auction Sale Process Is Commenced & The Property Is Auctioned & Sold On The Date Fixed For Sale & The Sale In Favour Of The Highest Bidder Is Confirmed & 25%

price and no one is allowed to exploit the vulnerable situation in which the borrower is placed. 34. At this juncture, it will also be worthwhile to refer to Rules 8(1) to (3) and in particular sub- rule (3), in order to note the responsibility of the secured creditor vis- à-vis the secured asset taken possession of. Under

M/S SREE JAYALAKSHMI TEXTILES vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION

Bench: The Date Fixed For Sale Of Transfer & In Such Event The Secured Asset Shall Not Be Sold & That Once The Auction Sale Process Is Commenced & The Property Is Auctioned & Sold On The Date Fixed For Sale & The Sale In Favour Of The Highest Bidder Is Confirmed & 25%

price and no one is allowed to exploit the vulnerable situation in which the borrower is placed. 34. At this juncture, it will also be worthwhile to refer to Rules 8(1) to (3) and in particular sub- rule (3), in order to note the responsibility of the secured creditor vis- à-vis the secured asset taken possession of. Under

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.WINTAC LTD.,

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

48, the capital gain is to be computed after reducing the cost of acquisition of the assets, cost of any improvement thereto and the expenditure incurred in connection with transfer of capital asset. Such cost is to be reduced from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer. There is no provision to substitute

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IND SING DEVELOPERS P LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

price of Rs.150/- sq.ft for the land has been fixed, but land was the capital to be introduced by the 32 assessee for the purpose of endeavor. That assessee had considerable stake, is clear from the fact that asseessee was obliged to offer the land as security for raising loans. Assessee had parted with possession with clear knowledge that