Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

ITAT Bangalore — Direct Tax

746 rulings

  1. ITAT Bangalore · 31 Jul 2020
    IBM India is eligible eligible to claim Sec 10AA deduction on incremental income arising pursuant to APA.

    IBM India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22976 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 10AA

  2. ITAT Bangalore · 31 Jul 2020
    As per the Agreements, the assessee is given a right to canvas the advertisement for entire advertisement space and become sole selling agent of BCCL and the payment made by the assessee to the sole selling agent is one made by agent to newspaper company and as per CBDT Circular No.5 of 2016, no tax need to be deducted on payment.

    Metropolitan Media Company Limited Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22975 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 194C

  3. ITAT Bangalore · 25 Jul 2020
    The stay already granted by the Tribunal deserves extension.

    Infosys Ltd vs ACIT

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22944 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  4. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Jul 2020
    The giving up of a right of specific performance by the assessee to get conveyance of immovable property in lieu of receiving consideration, results in the extinguishment of the right in property, thereby attracting the rigor of s. 2(14) r/w s. 2(47).

    Shri Chandrashekar Naganagouda Patil Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22880 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  5. ITAT Bangalore · 13 Jul 2020
    Clauses (iiihk) & (iiihl) of Section 80G(2) specifically excluded contribution to Swachh Bharat Kosh and Clean Ganga Fund.

    M/s. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22854 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 80G

  6. ITAT Bangalore · 13 Jul 2020
    This could not be established that there was any advance price agreement with the buyers and therefore, the assessee could not increase the selling price. This is also very important fact of the present case that 95% of the assessee's sales is made to the sister concern. Increase in cost is not only on account of increase in exchange rate of dollar but the purchase price in terms of dollar also has gone up because it is seen that the rate per meter was 1.33 US$ per meter during June to December 2007 and only in February to March 2008.

    M/S. CASA DEL TUBO VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 6 (1), BENGALURU.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22842 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83941&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  7. ITAT Bangalore · 13 Jul 2020
    If the person in question was not in India in the relevant previous year for 60 days or mor then such a person cannot be said to be a resident in India in that year. As per the copy of passport No. F5207571 submitted before us by learned AR of the assessee along with written submissions, it is seen that the name in the passport is Vijaya but as per the Assessment Order, the amount was received from Smt. Vijayalakshmi.

    M/S. ANTARIKSH SOFTTECH PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD – 1 (1) (2), BENGALURU.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22841 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83942&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  8. ITAT Bangalore · 07 Jul 2020
    Coming to quantification of construction/improvement carried out by assessee on plot purchased, there is mention of of some construction in the year 2005-06 being new building of 1400 sq.ft RCC roofing and shed 500 sq.ft with AC sheet roofing in valuation report dated 06/12/2012 by SPR Associates, placed at page 14 to Annexure 1 in paper book, The valuation report values new building constructed by assessee at ₹ 1,000/- per sq.ft and ₹ 800/- per sq.ft for shed, approximately valuing at 14 lakhs and 4 lakhs respectively.

    SHRI ADITYA B LINGARAJU VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE - 6 (2) (1), BANGALORE.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22814 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83882&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  9. ITAT Bangalore · 06 Jul 2020
    As decided in M/S. VBHC VALUE HOMES PVT. LTD., M/S. VBHC VALUE HOMES PVT. LTD. I is seen that the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of VODAFONE M-PESA LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND 6 OTHERS and restored the matter back to the file of the AO for a fresh decision with some directions that AO should follow DCF method only and he cannot change the method opted by the assessee as has been held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court.

    M/S. SIGNURE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE – 6 (1) (1), BENGALURU.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22803 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83829&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  10. ITAT Bangalore · 30 Jun 2020
    As on the date on which the AO referred the question of valuation of the property to the DVO, there was no bar in terms of Sec.50C (2)(b) of the Act.

    Ms. Benedicta Mary Mendonce Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22793 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 50C(2)(b)

  11. ITAT Bangalore · 02 Jul 2020
    Giving up of a right to claim specific performance by conveyance in respect to an immovable property, amounts to relinquishment of the capital asset. Therefore, there was a transfer of capital asset within the meaning of the Act. The payment of consideration under the agreement of sale, for transfer of a capital asset, is the cost of acquisition of the capital asset. Therefore, in lieu of giving up the said right, any amount received, constitutes capital gain and it is exigible to tax.

    SHRI CHANDRASHEKAR NAGANAGOUDA PATIL VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6 (2) (1) , BANGALORE

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22778 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83786&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  12. ITAT Bangalore · 02 Jul 2020
    We modify the order passed by Ld Pr. CIT and direct the AO to examine the claim of the assessee and compute the addition to be made under clause (f) to Explanation 1 to sec.115JB of the Act independently without having regard to the provisions of sec.14A of the Act.

    M/S TANGLIN DEVELOPMENTS LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (3) , CR BUILDINGS, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22777 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83787&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  13. ITAT Bangalore · 30 Jun 2020
    The assessee received the order on 19.04.2014 for the A.Y. 2014-15 and has filed rectification petition with the CPC-TDS for correction of statements which is not disputed, and the same was processed and order under Section 154 of the Act was passed by CPC TDS on 13.03.2019. Aggrieved by the order, the Assessee has filed an appeal under Section 246 of the Act with the CIT (Appeals).Considering the provisions of law and the facts of the case, we found the assessee has challenged the order under Section 154 of the Act, which is permissible under the Law.

    SHRI SRINIVASAMURTHY KOLIHALLY YALAKAIAH VERSUS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC – TDS, GHAZIABAD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22762 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83771&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. ITAT Bangalore · 29 Jun 2020
    Since the assessee had made such an estimate, the assessee's obligation u/s 192 was properly discharged and hence, proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) have to be quashed.

    Central Silk Board Vs The Income-Tax Officer (TDS)

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22761 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 201(1)/(1A)

  15. ITAT Bangalore · 29 Jun 2020
    ITAT - The investments made in partnership firms were also required to be considered for comparing the value of investments with the available own funds - Since investment in 'partnership firms & shares' higher than assessee's 'own funds', hence addition u/s. 14A confirmed.

    Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22760 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 14A

  16. ITAT Bangalore · 29 Jun 2020
    Purchaser of the property filed a letter before the Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Stamps, would not be sufficient to conclude that the value adopted for the purpose of stamp duty by the registering authorities had been disputed in an appeal revision before an authority as contemplated under Sec.50C(2)(b) of the Act. Apart from the above the AO made reference to the DVO before conclusion of the Assessment proceedings i.e., before 28.12.2018 on which date he passed the order of assessment.

    MS. BENEDICTA MARY MENDONCE VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 (3) (3) , BANGALORE

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22755 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83751&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  17. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Jun 2020
    ITAT - Valuation of shares for Sec. 56(2)(viib) - AO can scrutinize the valuation report and he can determine a fresh valuation either by himself or by calling a determination from an independent valuer to confront the assessee but the basis has to be DCF method and he cannot change the method of valuation which has been opted by the assessee.

    VBHC Value Homes Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22726 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 56(2)(viib)

  18. ITAT Bangalore · 25 Jun 2020
    ITAT - Sec.10A deduction granted on TP-adjustment in respect to enhanced income pursuant to MAP resolution.

    M/s. Dell International Services India Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22725 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 10A

  19. ITAT Bangalore · 24 Jun 2020
    It is a fact that along with the appeal memo filed in Form-36 the Assessee has also attached a copy of Form-10 filed before the AO. It is therefore, not correct on the part of the Tribunal to observe in the impugned order that Form-10 was not filed before the Tribunal. Apart from the above, also find that along with Form-10, a copy of the Board Resolution of the Assessee trust has been enclosed in which the purpose for which the accumulation is sought is clearly set out as “for construction of temple, 'Upashraya, Dharmashala' and objects of the trust”. It is thus, clear that the order of the Tribunal suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record which requires to be rectified.

    DEVICHAND KESAJI SWETHAMBAR JAIN TRUST VERSUS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (1) (1) , BANGALORE

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22709 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83714&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Bangalore · 19 Jun 2020
    We are of the view that the decision of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of CAE Flight Training (I) Pvt. Ltd. supports the plea of the assessee for allowing deduction on interest paid on CCDs held that the fact that the RBI under its Foreign Direct Investment Policy mandates conversion of debentures into equity and such mandate will not make any difference to the allowability of interest on debentures u/s. 36(1)(iii).

    IMS HEALTH ANALYTICS SERVICES PRIVATE LTD. [FORMERLY IMS HEALTH INDIA PVT. LTD. SINCE MERGED] VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3 (1) (1) , BANGALORE.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 22701 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=83680&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.