341 ITR 467 (Del) (3) ACIT v. S.K. Patel Family Trust

38 SOT 208Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#3480 most cited

What is 341 ITR 467 (Del) (3) ACIT v. S.K. Patel Family Trust authority for?

Depreciation on a building used for business purposes should be allowed following the rule of consistency if it was allowed in earlier assessment orders and the Assessing Officer raised no doubts about its use.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. S.K. Patel Family Trust · section 32(1) · depreciation · building · business purpose · rule of consistency · assessment orders · block of assets

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 22Section 23Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 41(1)Section 43(5)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 80ib(4)remission or cessation of liabilitysection 2(42c)section 41(2)section 43(6)(c)section 43(6)opening wdvsection 65b(4)section 50bspeculation losssection 73

Judgments citing 341 ITR 467 (Del) (3) ACIT v. S.K. Patel Family Trust

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2171/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

…ck of assets and once the assets are part of the block of assets it loses its individual cost or WDV and depreciation has to be allowed on opening WDV of block of assets. This is supported by the various judgements as noted below. (a) Swati Synthetics Vs. ITO 38 SOT 208 (Mum) (b) DCIT Vs. Boskalis Dredging India (P) Ltd. 23 Taxmann.com 4 (Mum) It has also been noticed that the concept of block of assets has been brought in the statute w.e.f 1.4.1988 and henceforth the deprecation is to be allowed on block of assets and not on individual items. The merger of various assets into the block of asset can be altered on…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1117/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

…ck of assets and once the assets are part of the block of assets it loses its individual cost or WDV and depreciation has to be allowed on opening WDV of block of assets. This is supported by the various judgements as noted below. (a) Swati Synthetics Vs. ITO 38 SOT 208 (Mum) (b) DCIT Vs. Boskalis Dredging India (P) Ltd. 23 Taxmann.com 4 (Mum) It has also been noticed that the concept of block of assets has been brought in the statute w.e.f 1.4.1988 and henceforth the deprecation is to be allowed on block of assets and not on individual items. The merger of various assets into the block of asset can be altered on…

India Medtronic P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2160/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarit(Tp)A No.2160/Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 India Meditronic Pvt. Ltd., Acit 10(1)(1) 1241 Solitaire Corporate Park, Mumbai Vs. Bldg. No.12, 4Th Floor, Andheri Ghatkopar Link Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 093

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R VoraFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B

…ses its identity for depreciation. From the record, we also found that in AY 2007-08, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has allowed the assessee’s ground by placing reliance on the decisions in case of CIT v Oswal Agro Mills (197 Taxman 25) (HC), Swati Synthetics Ltd v ITA (38 SOT 208) (Mumbai ITAT) and Allied Photographics (8 SOT 318) (Mumbai ITAT). The Department has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2007-08. However, the aforementioned issue was not taken in appeal by the Department before ITAT. We also found that Department accepted CIT(A) order for AY 2002-03. The CIT(A) has accepted the principle that with th…

India Medtronic Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 601/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Of 1241, Solitaire Corporate Income Tax-10(1)(1), Room Vs. Park, Bldg. No .12, 4Th Floor, No. 209, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri- Ghatkopar Link Mumbai-400020. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400093. Pan No. Aaaci4227Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rajan R. Vora, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Rajneesh Yadav, Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan R. Vora, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajneesh Yadav, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92B

…ppeal before the High Court), wherein after considering the order of India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. 7 the CIT(A) for AY 2007-08 (where Department has not filed appeal before the ITAT) and the decision in Ostwal Agro (Del) (197 Taxman 25) and Swaty Synthetics Ltd. (38 SOT 208) (ITAT Mumbai), the ITAT granted depreciation on plant and machinery and building. Facts being identical, we follow the above order of the Co-ordinate Bench and allow the 28th ground of appeal. 4. The 29th to 47th grounds of appeal relate to disallowance of payment to doctors of Rs.30,81,96,811/-. The AO disallowed convention expenses of Rs.31,20,…

The ITO, Cor.WD-1, Kochi vs. Bhagheeratha Engineering Limited, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 500/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 32(1)

…se of business during relevant assessment year. The Ld. AR relied on the following case laws: 1) Whittle Enderson Ltd. vs. CIT (79 ITR 613) 2) CIT vs. Khanna & Sons (148 ITR 558) 3) CIT vs. Suhrid Gegy Ltd. (133 ITR 884) 4) Swati Synthetics Ltd. vs. ITO (38 SOT 208) (Mum.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. In our opinion, the assessee has to prove the ownership as well as having physical possession of the said machinery and vehicles. The argument of the Ld. AR does not support that the assessee physically owned and was having control of the said machinery and vehicles. In our op…

Bharath Mines and Minerals, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(2)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1989/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, CA

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. Bharat Mines and The Assistant Minerals, Commissioner of Flat No. 101, Pride Elite, vs. Income Tax, No. 10, Museum Road, Circle – 1 (2) (1), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. PAN: AAIFB5964G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri K.R. Pradeep, CA : Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Respondent by Addl. CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 23.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 15.02.2019 O R D E R Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member This appeal…

Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Krystal Colloids P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 3170/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Krystal Colloids Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax 15(2)(1) Room Vs. 119, Purusharth Bldg., Nawroji No. 357, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Hill Road, No. 2, Dongri, Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Mumbai, 400009. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aacck5409J Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Anoop Hiwase, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala, Ar Date Of Hearing : 07/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Anoop Hiwase, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 47

…s context, we place reliance on the decision in Unitex Products Ltd. v. ITO [2008] 22 SOT 430 (Mum.), CIT v. Bharat Aluminum Co. Ltd. (2010) 187 Taxman 111 (Delhi), CIT v. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. (2011) 197 Taxman 25 (Delhi), Swati Synthetics Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 38 SOT 208 (Mum). 7.1 The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 349 ITR 309 (Bom) has held that whether a benefit of deduction is available for a particular number of years on satisfaction of certain conditions and under the provisions of the Act, then without withdrawing or setting aside the relief gran…

DCIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai vs. India Medtronic P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1800/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora and Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ses its identity for depreciation. From the record, we also found that in AY 2007-08, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has allowed the assessee’s ground by placing reliance on the decisions in case of CIT v Oswal Agro Mills (197 Taxman 25) (HC), Swati Synthetics Ltd v ITA (38 SOT 208) (Mumbai ITAT) and Allied Photographics (8 SOT 318) (Mumbai ITAT). The Department has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2007-08. However, the aforementioned issue was not taken in appeal by the Department before ITAT. We also found that Department accepted 1800/M/16-+2- India Medtronic Pvt.Ltd. CIT(A) order for AY 2002-03. The CIT(A…

India Medtronic P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1246/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora and Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ses its identity for depreciation. From the record, we also found that in AY 2007-08, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has allowed the assessee’s ground by placing reliance on the decisions in case of CIT v Oswal Agro Mills (197 Taxman 25) (HC), Swati Synthetics Ltd v ITA (38 SOT 208) (Mumbai ITAT) and Allied Photographics (8 SOT 318) (Mumbai ITAT). The Department has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2007-08. However, the aforementioned issue was not taken in appeal by the Department before ITAT. We also found that Department accepted 1800/M/16-+2- India Medtronic Pvt.Ltd. CIT(A) order for AY 2002-03. The CIT(A…

India Medtronic Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1600/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: S/Shri Jehangir Mistry, Hiren ChandeFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar- DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ses its identity for depreciation. From the record, we also found that in AY 2007-08, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has allowed the assessee’s ground by placing reliance on the decisions in case of CIT v Oswal Agro Mills (197 Taxman 25) (HC), Swati Synthetics Ltd v ITA (38 SOT 208) (Mumbai ITAT) and Allied Photographics (8 SOT 318) (Mumbai ITAT). The Department has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2007-08. However, the aforementioned issue was not taken in appeal by the Department before ITAT. We also found that Department accepted CIT(A) order for AY 2002-03. The CIT(A) has accepted the principle that with th…

Rohda Specialtiy Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

ITA 830/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish V ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajguru M
Section 143(3)

…ciation is allowable. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee also submits that depreciation is allowable even if unit remains closed during the entire year. For this he places reliance on the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of Swati Synthetics Ltd. Vs ITO [38 SOT 208] and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. [238 CTR 113]. 61. The Ld. DR placed reliance on the assessment order. 42 ITA NO. 830/MUM/2014 and ITA NO. 622/MUM/2014 M/s Rhodia Specialty Chemicals India Ltd. (Formerly known as M/s Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.) , A.Y : 2009-10 62. We have heard the rival submis…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

ITA 622/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish V ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajguru M
Section 143(3)

…ciation is allowable. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee also submits that depreciation is allowable even if unit remains closed during the entire year. For this he places reliance on the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of Swati Synthetics Ltd. Vs ITO [38 SOT 208] and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. [238 CTR 113]. 61. The Ld. DR placed reliance on the assessment order. 42 ITA NO. 830/MUM/2014 and ITA NO. 622/MUM/2014 M/s Rhodia Specialty Chemicals India Ltd. (Formerly known as M/s Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.) , A.Y : 2009-10 62. We have heard the rival submis…

Cybersol Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 8 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2749/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 2749/Mum/2016 : (A.Y : 2012-13) M/S Cybersol Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito 8(1)(2) 524-527, Raheja Metroplex Room No.601-A, 6Th Floor (Ijmima) Aayakar Bhavan Behind Goregaon Sports Club M.K.Road Off Link Road, Malad West Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan : Aabcc3318B (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K Gopal / Ms Neha Pranjape प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Jintendra Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2017 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : /04/2017

For Appellant: Shri K Gopal /For Respondent: Shri Jintendra Kumar
Section 2Section 32Section 43(6)Section 50

…o relied on the following decisions in support of his contentions : (a) CIT Vs. Yamaha Motor India (P) Ltd [226 CTR 204] (b) Inductotherm (I) Ltd Vs. DCIT [73 ITD 329] (c) JCIT Vs. City Group Overseas Software Ltd [85 TTJ 87] (d) Swati Synthetic Ltd. Vs. ITO [38 SOT 208] (Mumbai) (e) GR Shipping Ltd. Vs DCIT, ITA 822/Mum/2005 dated 17.07.2008. Appeal by the Revenue against this decision is dismissed by the High Court in ITA No.598/2009 dated 28.07.2009. 9. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. 10. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and…

Smt. Sudesh Yadav, Mahendergarh vs. ITO, Narnaul

The appeal is allowed

ITA 514/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri O.P. Kant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sudesh Yadav, Vs. Ito, W/O Vijay Paul Rao, Ward-2, Prop. M/S. Mahaluxmi Petroleum, Narnaul. Narnaul Road, Mohendergarh. (Pan: Abrpy5153A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.C. Yadav & Ms. Shubhangni Yadav, Adv. Department By: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17 .03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 31:03.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Assessee Has Questioned First Appellate Order Mainly On The Grounds That The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Sustaining The Disallowances Of: I) The Claimed Depreciation At Rs.4,56,960 On A New Tank Lorry Purchased For Rs.15,23,110; & Ii) Interest Of Rs.40,400 In Respect Of Old Advance Made To Dr. Rajbir Singh Out Of Self Capital. 2. Besides, An Application Has Been Moved By The Assessee Under Rule 11 Of The Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 For Allowing The Following Additional

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav & Ms. ShubhangniFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(11)Section 32(1)(iii)

…and 12 of the paper book wherein the salary paid to driver has been mentioned. He placed reliance on the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Oswal Agro- 238 CTR 113 (Del.); ii) CIT vs. Sonal Gum Industries – 322 ITR 542 (Guj.); iii) Swati Synthetic Ltd. vs. ITO – 38 SOT 208 (Mum.). 8. The Learned Senior DR on the contrary placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. She submitted that the authorities below have dealt with the issue in detail. 9. Considering the above submissions supported with the above cited decisions, we concur with the contention of the assessee that when an asset is mingled in a block…