PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, HYD vs. M/S. DECCAN GRAMEENA BANK, HYD

Appeals are dismissed on withdrawal

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

assessment Year 2009-2010 dated 19.10.2016 preferred against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax (Transfer Pricing), 6th floor, B Block

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S CONEXANT SYSTEMS PRIVATE LTD., HYD

Appeals are dismissed on withdrawal

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

assessment Year 2009-2010 dated 19.10.2016 preferred against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax (Transfer Pricing), 6th floor, B Block

THE PRINCIPAL COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S.CELON LABORATOERIES PVT LTD

Appeals are dismissed on withdrawal

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

assessment Year 2009-2010 dated 19.10.2016 preferred against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax (Transfer Pricing), 6th floor, B Block

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s Sri Indra Power Energies Limited

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

BLOCK, 11/1 & 12/1, AMARJYOTHI LAYOUT, INTERMEDIATE RING ROAD, BANGALORE-560 071. PAN: AABCB 2063Q. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) Date of Judgment -19-07-2018 I.T.A.No.538 /2015 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., Vs. M/s. Lam Research (India) Private Limited., 2/9 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, HYD vs. M/S. SUJANA METALS LTD, HYD

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

transfer of the assets. This decision of the CIT (A) has been upheld by the ITAT also dismissing the appeal of the Revenue vide impugned order dated 19th December, 2009. The ITAT downrightly observed that assessee seems to be the elite owner of the Trademark & Copyright of these publications. Also publications i.e. journals were undeniably capital assets of the assesee

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5 vs. M/s Vijay Textiles Limited

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

assess an AOP or its member, whichever was beneficial to the revenue, this option is no 6 more there under the corresponding charging section 4 of the present Act. This has been clearly brought out by Hon. Apex Court in the case of Ch Atchaiah’s case (supra). The scheme of taxation of AOP under different circumstances has been laid

The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) vs. Madhu Enterprises

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

Block, Chandrabali Udhyan, Road No.1, Keshidih, Sakchi, Jamshedpur through its Director-cum-Authorized Signatory Prince Kumar Agarwal ..... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi 2. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur 3. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Jamshedpur Circle, Jamshedpur .…. … Respondents With W.P.(T) No.3086

S.l. Shiva Raj vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Block, Chandrabali Udhyan, Road No.1, Keshidih, Sakchi, Jamshedpur through its Director-cum-Authorized Signatory Prince Kumar Agarwal ..... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi 2. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur 3. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Jamshedpur Circle, Jamshedpur .…. … Respondents With W.P.(T) No.3086

Comissioner of Income Tax, vs. P. Ramakrishna Prasad (HUF),

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

assessed by Salary Circle-Eranakulam. From out of his savings he had not only discharged the said balance of price but also subsequently having served in the said Company which was taken over by TATAs, for 20 long years, he had accumulated Provident Fund and Gratuity with which he had not only improved the schedule property but purchased Lower Gowankan

The Commissioner of Income -Tax - III, vs. Shri Taher Ali

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

block plan of building whereas detail plan shows only a portion which extent to chajja less by 3” is covered by breaking the existing 9” thick wall along with window and door. Presently the backside wall portion is covered with Rolling shutter of full width of wall and height upto chajja bottom level. This has developed cracks in the beam

K.V.D.PRASAD RAO vs. THE JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

price imelf. The actions of the assessee group /zi-.. assessee being given General Pou-er of Attomey b1'all 109 members to undenake transter oi sheres, Rs.S.26 crores being distributed to all members at fu.2[ per share strongly substantiate this fact. it can be seid that the assessee/group is resoning to rcduce/,rxricl the ta-x pliabiliry through

The commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s Lanco Kondapalli Power (P) Ltd

Block, Sector 10, MIDC, Pimpri Colony, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Maharashtra 412 210. …Petitioner ~ versus ~ 1. State of Maharashtra, through The Department of Registration and Stamps Ministry of Revenue, Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 032 And State of Maharashtra Through the Government Pleader PWD Building, High Court, Mumbai 400 001. 2. Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Stamps, Department

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/s Vaishnavi Educational Society

In the result, this Cross Objection is allowed and the suit is

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

BLOCK NO. 950, ASKAR, MANAMA BAHRAIN (ORIGINALLY HAD ADDRESS AT MMP BUILDING, CHETTIKONATHU CHITTUVITTU MURI, THOLICODE VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD - 695 541) RFA 554/15 & CON. CASES 6 3 B.M. RAFI, AGED 42, S/O. BADARUDEEN, RAFI MANZIL, NADICHIRA, THENGUMKARA, KARIPPOORU VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 541. 4 SAJEED, AGED 41, S/O. SHIHABUDEEN, T.C 5/1, SREE NILAYAM, N.C.C ROAD, AMBALAMUKKU, PEROORKADA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

J Anjaneya Sharma vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-V

BLOCK, 15/3, 16, KADUBEESANAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD BANGALORE-560087. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI ANKUR PAI, ADV. FOR SRI K.R. VASUDEVAN, ADV.) AND : INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 11 [1], R.P. BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) THESE INCOME TAX APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 07.06.2013, PASSED

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

block of shares in UCL, BCrL and VTL. Charitable societies and trusts are not part of the estate of the testatrix which are managed by the respective managing committees and trustees of the societies or trusts. The companies are separate legal entities controlled by their Board of Directors and the affairs of the estate of the testatrix do not include

The Pr. Commissioner of Income tax (Central), vs. Sri Vaishnavi Educational Society,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar W.P. No.51929/2014 C/W W.P.Nos.42063/2012, 30494/2013, 42671/2013, 638/2014, 797/2014, 1089/2014, 3211/2014, 3389/2014, 6180/2014, 10356/2014, 12014/2014, 12015/2014, 13043/2014, 13045/2014, 13206/2014, 13207/2014, 13398/2014, 13774/2014, 14149/2014, 14161/2014, 14494/2014, 14502/2014, 14521/2014, 14689/2014, 16646/2014, 17051/2014, 17594/2014, 19729/2014, 21158/2014, 23897/2014, 28861/2014, 30731/2014, 31723/2014, 33774/2014, 33777/2014, 34084/2014, 34259/2014, 34272/2014, 34391/2014, 35204/2014, 35243/2014, 35247/2014, 35305/2014, 35609/2014, 36164/2014, 36166/2014, 36489/2014, 36525/2014, 36971/2014, 37446/2014, 38055/2014, 38463/2014, 38471/2014, 38472/2014, 38661/2014, 38753/2014, 39383/2014, 39633/2014, 39832/2014, 40204/2014, 40379/2014, 41394/2014, 41422/2014, 41427/2014, 41428/2014, 41858/2014, 43815/2014, 43963/2014, 44306/2014, 44527/2014, 44742/2014, 44835/2014, 45486/2014, 46766/2014, 47103/2014, 47105/2014, 47106/2014, 47107/2014, 47608/2014, 47731/2014, 47821/2014, 47860/2014, 47913/2014, 48577/2014, 48880/2014, 49567/2014, 50260/2014, 50533/2014, 51294/2014, 51930/2014, 51931/2014, 51932/2014, 52760/2014, 53854/2014, 54059/2014, 54083/2014, 54236/2014

BLOCK HBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 043 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRA SHEKAR R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT MULTISTORIED BUILDING DR B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD BANGALORE- 560 001 2. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONER T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE - 560 020 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S GOLDEN STAR FACILITIES AND SERVICES PVT LTD., HYD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

assessed on him, and (iii) paid the income tax on the basis of self-assessment as provided in the Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961). (2) Except with the previous approval of the Central Government, no prospecting licence or mining lease shall be granted in respect of any mineral specified in the First Schedule

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s Mohan Milk Line Private Limited,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

BLOCK B (TOWER 2), SEZ CAMPUS, GLOBAL VILLAGE, RVCE POST, MYLASANDRA, OIT MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 059. PAN:AACCT 0118M. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) Date of Judgment -18-07-2018 I.T.A.No.396 /2015 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., Vs. M/s. Textron Global Technology Centre Private Ltd., 2/9 THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, PRAYING