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 · 08 Jan 2020
    The daughter and member of the HUF have given money for certain specific purpose. The source and genuineness of the loan has been accepted by the AO. The cash loans in question therefore cannot be said fall within the mischief of Sec.269SS of the Act as near relatives cannot be said to be “Other person” within the meaning of Sec.269SS of the Act. In any event in the circumstances of the case, there was reasonable cause for accepting loans in cash. We, set aside the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and cancel the penalties levied u/s. 271E/271D.

    MR. MOHAMMADYUSUF R. DARGAD VERSUS THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2, HUBBALLI.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20775 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81216&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  2. ITAT Bangalore · 08 Jan 2020
    It is not in dispute that the assessee had paid the impugned retention money as per the terms and conditions of the corresponding agreement with the other parties. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Chainrup Sampatram vs CIT settled the law long back that although anticipated losses can be allowed to be deducted from commercial proceeds at the first sign of its reasonable probability, the converse is not true regarding anticipated profits to be treated as income unless the same are realized going by the principles of conservatism and commercial prudence.

    ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (1), KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. MCNALLY BHARAT ENGINEERING CO. LTD.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20774 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81213&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  3. ITAT Bangalore · 08 Jan 2020
    The organization to which the assessee paid interest viz., Karnataka Building & Other Construction Workers Welfare Board was an entity falling within section 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Act and therefore there was no obligation on the part of assessee to deduct tax at source on payment of interest to the aforesaid organization.

    STATE BANK OF INDIA [FORMERLY STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE] , COX TOWN BRANCH VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16 (2), BANGALORE.

    (2020) TaxCorp(LJ) 20773 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=81212&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  4. ITAT Bangalore · 30 Dec 2019
    Assessee placed before us Form 26A issued by accountant of assessee, in respect of payment made by assessee to these alleged nine doctors. As additional evidence in respect of these nine doctors which in our considered opinion, deserves to be admitted and requires due verification also. In our opinion, Ld.AO will have to verify all these details to ascertain true facts.

    M/S SHIVA & SHIVA ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITALS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20709 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=80979&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  5. ITAT Bangalore · 27 Dec 2019
    Where the assessee society is having more than 15% Associated Members, there is a violation of the provisions of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and in that situation, assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s. 80P.

    Kanakadas Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20700 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 80P

  6. ITAT Bangalore · 26 Dec 2019
    There is no requirement of transfer of any capital asset being shares only requirement is that a shareholder receives a consideration from a company for purchase of its own shares. This judgment is an authority regarding applicability of section 46A in respect of receipt by shareholder on account of buy back of shares from the concerned company but there was no argument or decision about applicability of section 47 (iv) of I T Act.

    M/s. Acciona Wind Energy Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20693 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 47(iv)

  7. ITAT Bangalore · 18 Dec 2019
    The payment in the present case is online and the credit to the Government's account is instant. The Central Government Account (Receipts and Payments) Rules, 1983 do not apply to payments online but are applicable to payments made by cheques.

    M/s. Moody’s Analytics Knowledge Services (India) Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer (TDS)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20645 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 201(1A)

  8. ITAT Bangalore · 04 Dec 2019
    Since the assessee had failed to show that it had incurred any expenditure in earning interest income, the claim of the assessee cannot be accepted.

    The Malleshwaram Association Vs The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20562 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  9. ITAT Bangalore · 14 Nov 2019
    In coming to its conclusion, SMC bench has duly considered the earlier order of the Division Bench. The order of SMC bench of the tribunal is also binding on the present bench and since the earlier order of Division bench is duly considered by SMC bench, I am duty bound to follow this later tribunal order of SMC Bench.

    Mahalakshmi Souharda Credit Co Operative Ltd Vs The Income Tax Officer

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20446 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 80P

  10. ITAT Bangalore · 14 Nov 2019
    Considering the facts, submissions and judicial decisions and applying the logical consideration found that when the liability payable by the assessee is Rs.80,940 and levying the cost of Rs.50,000 is absurd on face and hence, it is an apparent mistake rectifiable under Section 254(2) of the Act.

    Ample Mart Vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20445 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 254(2)

  11. ITAT Bangalore · 01 Nov 2019
    The term Industrial Undertaking having been defined in the Act, though for a different statutory provision, can be a guiding factor to the intention of the legislature to apply that definition to statutory provision in which the said term has not been defined.

    Manhattan Associates (India) Development Centre Pvt. Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20349 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  12. ITAT Bangalore · 26 Oct 2019
    Recovery of Tax u/s 220(6)/ 245: (i) The term “recovery” is comprehensive and includes adjustment thereby reducing the demand; (ii) It will be specious & illogical for the Revenue to contend that if an issue is decided in favour of the assessee giving rise to a refund in an earlier year, that refund can be adjusted u/s 245, on account of the demand on the same issue in a subsequent year (iii) The decisions of CIT(A) & Tribunal in favour of the assessee should not be ignored, (iv) Income-tax officials are officers of the State and the Law requires that they perform their duties with utmost objectivity and fairness, while keeping in mind the sanctity of the role and function assigned to them which at times requires tough steps (Maruti Suzuki Ltd 347 ITR 47 (Del) followed)

    Volvo Group India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20328 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Sections 220(6), 245

  13. ITAT Bangalore · 23 Oct 2019
    As decided in HTSL COMMUNITY SERVICE TRUST it is not a case that the assessee did not file a return of income at all. During the year preceding the relevant assessment year, the assessee-trust was formed. The relevant previous year was the first year of activities of the assessee and the assessee was not familiar with the relevant provisions of filing of return of income and the procedure involved thereof.

    M/S. ROTARY CHARITABLE TRUST VERSUS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS RANGE, HUBBALLI.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20305 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78661&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  14. ITAT Bangalore · 22 Oct 2019
    U/S. 68 of the Act, it is only the credit entry appearing in the books of account of an assessee for the relevant previous year, that can be treated as unexplained cash credit in the absence of proper explanation by the assessee. Therefore, the opening balances cannot be added u/s. 68.

    M/S. KNR ROOFING PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20298 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78639&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  15. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Oct 2019
    Since the assessee had already claimed exemption towards the cost of assets as application of income in the year of acquisition, allowing exemption towards repayment of loan (taken for acquiring the said assets) would result in double exemption for the same amount.

    Medical Relief Society of South Kanara Vs The Income-tax Officer (Exemptions)

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20279 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  16. ITAT Bangalore · 16 Oct 2019
    Outstanding demand arising out of issues already decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in the earlier AYs cannot be recovered.

    Volvo Group India Pvt Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20265 (ITAT-BANGALORE)

  17. ITAT Bangalore · 15 Oct 2019
    The provisions of sec. 197A(1A) merely requires a declaration to be filed by the payee of interest and once it is filed, the payer of the interest has not choice except to desist from deducting tax at source from the interest paid. Non-mentioning of PAN in Form No.15G and Form No.15H is only a technical breach, when the payees were having PAN.

    THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD., BELLARY BRANCH, BELLARY. VERSUS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX TDS CIRCLE, HUBLI.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20259 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78459&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  18. ITAT Bangalore · 11 Oct 2019
    It is not practically possible for the AO to allow TDS credit in the year in which corresponding income is offered to tax and it is for the assessee to point out the correct year and thereafter the AO can grant the TDS credit.

    M/s. Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd., Vs The DCIT

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20251 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · Section 244A

  19. ITAT Bangalore · 11 Oct 2019
    Possession is handed over to the builder only for limited purpose to enter upon the property for the purpose of implementation of JDA. In the present case, such permission to enter the scheduled property is granted subject to completion of certain conditions i.e. on approval of the plan and grant of licence for construction of the buildings from BBMP and/or from concerned authorities.

    SHRI A.R. PRASAD, SMT. A.P. LAKSHMI GOWRI VERSUS THE ITO, WARD – 6 (2) (4) , BANGALORE.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20241 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=78371&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  20. ITAT Bangalore · 23 Sep 2019
    The loss incurred in subscribing to chit fund is allowable if funds raised from such chit is utilized for the purpose of business. On this aspect, there is no finding of authorities below. Before us, the assessee has brought certain additional evidences on record in the form of ledger account of various chits as well as copy of bank statements and it is being claimed before us that the money raised through chit was used for the business purpose.

    M/S. INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LTD. VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE – 3 (1) (1) , BANGALORE.

    (2019) TaxCorp(LJ) 20127 (ITAT-BANGALORE) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=77894&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.