(CIT v. Crown Products

304 ITR 106High Court2008#20521 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing (CIT v. Crown Products

SANJAY G VADODARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 25(3)(4), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4419/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Sanjay G. Vadodaria, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 29/B Roop Kamal 426, S.V. 25(3)(4), Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400067 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaepv9502A यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Mrs. Zarna P. Chandwani & Mr. Pradeep Chandwani याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri Vishwas Mundhe-Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

Section 32oSection 42

…eaters (2000) 244 ITR 192 (SC), CIT vs Daudayal Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (282 ITR 132)(Guj.)). The position of law is well settled that the depreciation allowance is a normal 9 Sanjay G. Vadodaria wear and tear, out of use of the asset/vehicle (CIT vs Crown Products 304 ITR 106 (Guj.)). The Hon’ble Madras High Court in Velimalai Rubber Company Ltd. Vs ITO (1999) 240 ITR 618, 623 (Mad.) held that, where it is found that the assessee is not the owner of the asset in respect of which depreciation is claimed, the assessee is not entitled to claim such depreciation. However, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in CIT vs Nidish Tra…

PREMESHWAR CREATIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6852/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Permeshwar Creations Dcit-8(2), Pvt. Ltd. Room No.209, बनाम/ Plot No.52, 7Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Midc Marol, M.K. Road, Andheri(E), Churchgate, Mumbai-400093 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aadcp3517F

Section 32

…y, in our view, assessee is the owner of the asset, therefore, following the ratio laid down in following cases:- i. CIT vs Poddar Cements Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), ii. CIT vs Daudayal Hotels Pvt. Ltd.) (2006) 282 ITR 132 (Guj.). iii. CIT vs Crown Products (2008) 304 ITR 106 (Guj.) iv. CIT vs Gujarati Samaj (2012) 349 ITR 559 (MP). We are of the view that depreciation on the applicable rates, during the relevant time, has to be allowed to the assessee. It is not the case of the Revenue that these motor cars were not used for business purposes of the assessee company or used by the Directors for their personal purpo…

ALKYL AMINES CHEMICALS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2897/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2897/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Alkyl Amines Chemicals Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Limited, 401-402, Income Tax – Range 10(3) V. Nirman Vypar Kendra, Mumbai. Plot No. 10, Sector-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaaca6783F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran

Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 35Section 36(1)(vii)

…facility should be approved by the prescribed authority and there is no mandate as to the form of application or approval. The assessee relied on following decisions: (i) Mukta Arts Private Limited v. ACIT , 105 ITD 533(Mum. Trib) (ii) CIT v. Crown Products, 304 ITR 106 (iii) Fenoplast Limited v. ACIT, 82 ITD 178(Hyd Trib) (iv) ACIT v. Tusnial Trading Co. , 61 TTJ 700(Gau. Trib.) (v) ITO v. Meghalaya Bonded Warehouse, 60 TTJ 219(Gau. Trib) The learned CIT(A) called for remand report from the AO to verify genuineness of the claim of the assessee. The remand report was sent by the AO to the learned CIT(A). The le…

KEDIA SHARES & STOCK BROKERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 4(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6128/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Kedia Shares & Stock Acit, Brokers Limited, Circle-4(3), बनाम/ 418, Commerce House, Room No.649, 6Th Floor, Vs. 140, Nagindas Master Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400023 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aaack2528E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 32oSection 42

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ए, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI "ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" । Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member Assessment Year-2010-11 Kedia Shares & Stock ACIT, Brokers Limited, Circle-4(3), बनाम/ 418, Commerce House, Room No.649, 6th Floor, Vs. 140, Nagindas Master Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400023 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 PAN No.AAACK2528E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Mr. Rishabh Shah Shri M. Murli -DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenu…