ITAT Bangalore held that deduction towards reversal of provision for inventory written off due to obsolescence allowable since the same stands offered to tax in the year in which provision was created.
ITAT Bangalore held that payments made by [Google Ireland Limited] GIL towards Adwords program is not in the nature of royalty or FTS [Fees for Technical Service] and hence the same is not taxable in India.
ITAT Bangalore held that penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act not leviable in terms of section 273B of the Income Tax Act since claim of exemption u/s. 54 is made in an open and bonafide manner.
Sales and marketing services rendered to assessee by its US based subsidiary did not fall within the ambit of FTS as defined u/s 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of India-US DTAA as making available service did not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc.
ITAT Restores Case to CIT(A) as CIT(A) inadvertently referenced facts and findings not present in the assessment order, leading to discrepancies in the appellate review.
The fiction created by Section 11 of the Acquisition Act, does not imply that the assessee bank would also become a company for the purpose of the Companies Act for which Clause (b) of Sub-Section 2 of Section 115JB is applicable.
ITAT Bangalore held that interest due to delayed payment of custom duty is deductible u/s 37 of the Act as it is an accretion to the main payment and not a penalty and accordingly allowable as deduction.
Section 36(1)(vii) of ITA applied separately to non-rural debts, while Section 36(1)(viia) of the tax statute only applied to rural debts, making it clear that banks were entitled to claim both deductions, provided they pertained to different types of advances.
ITAT Bangalore allows appeal for Saraswathi M Khjuri, remanding the case for fresh adjudication due to communication errors and procedural concerns in the assessment process.
ITAT Bangalore held that there was no proper response during the assessment proceedings as well as in the appellate proceedings. Accordingly, issue remanded back to the file of AO subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000.
