Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT

111 ITD 112Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#809 most cited

What is Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT authority for?

Depreciation is allowable on computer software, including software licenses, at the rate of 60%.

127

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT · 111 ITD 112 · depreciation on software · computer software depreciation · software license depreciation · depreciation rate 60% · intangible assets · written down value · Section 32 · ITAT Special Bench

Also reported as

111 ITR 112

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 147Section 148Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40(a)(i)Section 40(a)(ia)

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on softwaresection 33accomputer softwaresection 64section 40(a)(ii)section 35dwritten down valuefirst proviso to section 147section 115jb(2)intangible assetsretrospective amendmentgoing concern

Judgments citing Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT

Harita Fehrer Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC - 2 (2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2746/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…be used along with computer system. Nevertheless, the same would remain computer software only which would have same rate of depreciation as applicable to a computer system. The decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Delhi)] supports our view. It could also be seen that similar rate of 60% has already been allowed by revenue to the assessee in all the other years and this dispute has been raised in this year only. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to allow depreciation at higher rate of 60%. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee stand allowed. 13. Issu…

Harita Fahrer Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-2(2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3481/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…be used along with computer system. Nevertheless, the same would remain computer software only which would have same rate of depreciation as applicable to a computer system. The decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Delhi)] supports our view. It could also be seen that similar rate of 60% has already been allowed by revenue to the assessee in all the other years and this dispute has been raised in this year only. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to allow depreciation at higher rate of 60%. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee stand allowed. 13. Issu…

Harita Fahrer Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-2(2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3480/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…be used along with computer system. Nevertheless, the same would remain computer software only which would have same rate of depreciation as applicable to a computer system. The decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Delhi)] supports our view. It could also be seen that similar rate of 60% has already been allowed by revenue to the assessee in all the other years and this dispute has been raised in this year only. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to allow depreciation at higher rate of 60%. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee stand allowed. 13. Issu…

Harita Fehrer Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Salary Circle II, Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2254/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…be used along with computer system. Nevertheless, the same would remain computer software only which would have same rate of depreciation as applicable to a computer system. The decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Delhi)] supports our view. It could also be seen that similar rate of 60% has already been allowed by revenue to the assessee in all the other years and this dispute has been raised in this year only. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to allow depreciation at higher rate of 60%. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee stand allowed. 13. Issu…

Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai vs. Peninsula Land Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4136/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…d of 60%. Ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Ld.CIT(A). Further, he submitted that the issue relating the software expenses has been considered by the special bench of the Tribunal in the case of Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Del) (SB)] and restricted the depreciation on software expenses at 60%. Therefore, Ld. AR of the assessee prayed that depreciation on software expenses be restricted to 60% and that of order of the Ld.CIT(A) be set-aside. 14. On the other hand, Ld.DR relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 15. Considered the submissions and material placed on re…

Peninsula Land Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3717/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…d of 60%. Ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Ld.CIT(A). Further, he submitted that the issue relating the software expenses has been considered by the special bench of the Tribunal in the case of Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT [111 ITD 112 (Del) (SB)] and restricted the depreciation on software expenses at 60%. Therefore, Ld. AR of the assessee prayed that depreciation on software expenses be restricted to 60% and that of order of the Ld.CIT(A) be set-aside. 14. On the other hand, Ld.DR relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 15. Considered the submissions and material placed on re…

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 852/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar S. K, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…e it is in the nature of revenue expenditure. The AO, however, disallowed the expenditure treating it as capital in nature, relying on the following case laws:- i. CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. (P) Ltd., 259 ITR 30 (Raj) ii. Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, 111 ITD 112 (Del)(SB). 7. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the issue in favour of the assessee based on his order in assessee’s own case for AY 2008-09. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The ld. DR submitted that EDA software is purchased and charged to the assessee on usage basis, therefore the original software is capital in na…

Joint Commisioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Texas Instruments India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 831/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar S. K, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…e it is in the nature of revenue expenditure. The AO, however, disallowed the expenditure treating it as capital in nature, relying on the following case laws:- i. CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. (P) Ltd., 259 ITR 30 (Raj) ii. Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, 111 ITD 112 (Del)(SB). 7. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the issue in favour of the assessee based on his order in assessee’s own case for AY 2008-09. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The ld. DR submitted that EDA software is purchased and charged to the assessee on usage basis, therefore the original software is capital in na…

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 606/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

M/S Texas Instruments India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 365/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore vs. M/S. Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1447/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore vs. M/S. Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1446/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

M/S. Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1076/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

M/S. Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1075/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax(Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S. Texas Instruments(India) Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1967/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…1447/Bang/2019 ITA Nos. 365, 1075,1076/Bang-2019 Page 8 of 38 expenditure of capital nature and rightly allowed depreciation as per rules." 5.5 Reliance is also placed on the decision in the case of Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del-Special Bench) [111 ITD 112]. In this case the Hon'ble ITAT held that computer software was tangible asset eligible for depreciation @ 60%. In the result, the Automation software expenses of Rs. 135,52,51,594/- are held to be capital in nature. The amount as claimed in P 86 L a/c is disallowed and added back. Instead, the assessee is allowed depreciation on the amount @ 60…

M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed partly

ITA 2870/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 9Th Floor Prestige Of Income-Tax Thirulakshmi Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) No.11 M.G. Road Bengaluru Bengaluru 560 001 Pan No : Aabcs6967N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Respondent By : D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai: Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16/10/2017 Passed By The Ld.Dcit Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(13) For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40Section 92C

…rieved by the addition made by the Ld.AO, assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. IT(TP)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Page 31 of 32 41. The Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Special Bench Delhi Tribunal in case of Amway India Enterprises reported at 111 ITD 112 and the decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal in case of IBM India (P.) Ltd., reported 83 ITR(T) 24 (2020) and decision of Infosys Ltd in IT(TP)A.No. 102 and 233/B/2013 wherein computer software was also included along with computers eligible for depreciation at 60%. The Ld.AR also submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Special Bench Delhi…

Ingersoll - Rand International (India) Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of assessee as well as revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 549/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.549/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 40

…IT(TP)A Nos.487 & 549/Bang/2015 Ingersoll Rand International India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.549/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ingersoll Rand International (India) Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Ingersoll Rand Deputy International (India) Limited) Commissioner of 8th Floor, Tower D, IBC Knowledge Park, Vs. Income-tax No.4/1, Bannerghatta Main Road Circle-3(1)(1) Bangalore Bangalore PAN NO :AABCI3371E APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.487/Bang/2015 Assessment…

D.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Ingersoll - Rand International India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of assessee as well as revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 487/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.549/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 40

…IT(TP)A Nos.487 & 549/Bang/2015 Ingersoll Rand International India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.549/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ingersoll Rand International (India) Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Ingersoll Rand Deputy International (India) Limited) Commissioner of 8th Floor, Tower D, IBC Knowledge Park, Vs. Income-tax No.4/1, Bannerghatta Main Road Circle-3(1)(1) Bangalore Bangalore PAN NO :AABCI3371E APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.487/Bang/2015 Assessment…

Grasim Industries Ltd vs. Addl. CIT Range 6(3)

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 4753/MUM/2004[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blegrasim Industries Limited V. Addl. Cit, Range 6(3) Corporate Finance Division 5Th Floor, Room No. 505 Aditya Birla Centre “A” Wing Aayakar Bhavan 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai Mumbai-400025 Pan: Aaacg4464B Appellant Respondent Dy. Cit, Range 6(3), V. Grasim Industries Limited, 5Th Floor, Room No. 505, Corporate Finance Division, Aayakar Bhavan, Aditya Birla Centre, “A” Wing, Mumbai-20. 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg Worli, Mumbai-400025 Pan: Aaacg4464B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistry Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj & Shri Vijay Kumar Menon

For Appellant: Shri J.D. MistryFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj &
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43BSection 80Section 80H

…6 ITR 138 (Bom. HC)], Kotak Securities Ltd., [346 ITR 349 (Bom. HC)], Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. [TS-640-HC-2011 (Delhi HC)], Amway India Enterprises [346 ITR 341 (Delhi HC)], DCIT v. Lubi Electricals O. Ltd. (ITA No. 1163/Ahd/92), Amway India Enterprises [111 ITD 112 (Delhi SB)], Empire jute Co. Ltd [124 ITR 1 (SC)], Media Video Ltd [122 Taxman 28 (Delhi ITAT)] and Forbes Campbell & Co. Ltd in ITA No. 8489/Bom/88 (Mumbai ITAT) and requested the same be adopted in the case of assessee also. 98. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 99. Considered the submissions and material placed…

DCIT, Circle-12(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Mortgage Guarantee Corporation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5263/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit, Vs Indian Mortgage Guarantee Circle-12(1), Corporation Pvt.Ltd., A-47, Lower New Delhi. Ground Floor, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110049. Pan-Aaccg6775B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Hiten Chande, Ca Respondent By Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 09.11.2021

…es India Pvt. Limited vs. DCIT (ITA No.617, 697, 698/Mds/2011), Chennai ITAT. IV. ACIT vs. Voltamp Transformers Ltd. (ITA No. 1676/Ahd/2012), Ahmadabad, ITAT V. TNS India Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2015)(69 SOT 22), Hyderabad ITAT VI. Amway India Enterprises Vs. DCIT, 111 ITD 112, Delhi ITAT. VII. Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemicals Corpn. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITA Nos. 4904 & 5027/Mum/2009) 6.1. I have carefully gone through the finding of the AO, submission of the appellant and the case laws. Ld. AR has relied upon decision of IT AT Delhi in the case of M/s Amway India Enterprises (supra) in which ITAT has allowed depreciation…