CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga

201 ITR 995High Court1993#2921 most cited

What is CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga authority for?

Registration of a motor vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act is not a prerequisite for claiming depreciation under the Income Tax Act. Beneficial ownership and actual use for business purposes are sufficient.

40

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga · section 32 · depreciation · motor vehicle · ownership · beneficial ownership · registration · Motor Vehicles Act · business use

Also reported as

77 Taxmann 66

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37Section 143(1)Section 145(1)Section 145(3)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

put to usesection 32transfersection 143personcompanybusinesssection 143(3)indianfacdocumentsection 14

Judgments citing CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga

Raja Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT 27(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3081/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 32

…horities have also proceeded on the same footing while declining depreciation at the rate of 30%. 7. The Hon'ble Court has also referred and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga reported in 201 ITR 995 and Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Salkia Transport Associates reported in 143 ITR 39. 8. A sequitur that emerges from the catena of judicial pronouncements is that registration under the Regional Transport Office, though statutorily mandated under the Motor Vehicles Act, does not constitute a sine qua non for claiming depreci…

Ahluwalia Erectors and Febrications Pvt. Ltd., Kota vs. ACIT Cir-1 Kota, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 953/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 953/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 cuke Ahluwalia Erectors & Febricators ACIT Vs. Pvt. Ltd. Circle-01, E-77, IPIA, Kota Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAHCA 0089 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Sh. Hemang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo…

Sadhana Nayyar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 17(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1310/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250

…C). b) Commissioner of Income Tax V. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd., [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC). c) Commissioner of Income Tax V. Mirza Ataullaha Baig, [1993] 202 ITR 291 (Bom-HC). 4 Sadhana Nayyar d) Commissioner of Income Tax V. Dilip Singh Sardar Singh Bagga, [1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bom-HC-Nag) e) CIT V. Aravali Fin Lease Ltd., [2012] 341 ITR 282(Guj-HC). f) CIT V. Basti Sugar Mills Ltd., [2002] 257 ITR 88 (Del-HC). g) Income Tax Officer V. Electro Ferro Alloys Ltd. [2012] 13 ITR 594 (Ahd-Trib). h) ACIT, Circle 6 Ahmedabad V. Gopal Fabrics, order dated 29.11.2013 passed by ITAT Ahd in ITAT no. 3338/Ahd/2010 and 463/Ahd/2013…

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Income Tax Department vs. S D Material Handlers Private Limited, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.499/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S S D Material Handlers Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat Vs. 405-408, Shivalik Western, L.P. Room No.612, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Savani Road, Adajan Adajan Bhavan, Near Majura Gate, Bo, Surat-395009 Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccd 3481B (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

…also proceeded on the same footing while declining depreciation at the rate of 30%. 38. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to and rely upon a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [1994] 77 Taxman 66/[1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bom.), wherein the following view has been taken : "4. The word "owner", as observed by the Supreme Court in R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (at page 578) has different meanings in different contexts and in certain circumstances even a lessee may be considered as the owner of the property leased to him. It was also held to be so…

M/S Poornachand Agrawal, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 104/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 104/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Pooranchand Agrawal C/O. Bagadia Enterprises, Near Shiv Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495001 Pan : Aaifp8483G

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…bility of an assessee’s claim for deprecation on a vehicle. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the 10 M/s. Pooranchand Agrawal Vs. Pr. CIT, Raipur-1 case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga (1993) 201 ITR 995 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court had held that the registration under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is not an essential requirement for the acquisition of ownership of the motor vehicle and the assessee who had purchased the motor vehicle for valuable consideration and used the same for his business, cannot be denied the benefit of depreciatio…

Laffans Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-10(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 300/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 43Section 43(5)

…chased in the name of director, the company cannot be denied depreciation on the same, if the asset is otherwise found to be used for the purpose of business. The decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) clearly supports the stand of the assessee. We, thus, set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the motor vehicle and related expenses on motor vehicle. Accordingly, this Ground of appeal is also treated as allowed.” There has been no change in the facts in the impugned assessment year, hence…

Laffans Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 10(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 299/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 43Section 43(5)

…chased in the name of director, the company cannot be denied depreciation on the same, if the asset is otherwise found to be used for the purpose of business. The decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) clearly supports the stand of the assessee. We, thus, set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the motor vehicle and related expenses on motor vehicle. Accordingly, this Ground of appeal is also treated as allowed.” There has been no change in the facts in the impugned assessment year, hence…

Laffans Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir -10(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 298/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 43Section 43(5)

…chased in the name of director, the company cannot be denied depreciation on the same, if the asset is otherwise found to be used for the purpose of business. The decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) clearly supports the stand of the assessee. We, thus, set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the motor vehicle and related expenses on motor vehicle. Accordingly, this Ground of appeal is also treated as allowed.” There has been no change in the facts in the impugned assessment year, hence…

ACIT 2 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. Laffans Petrochemicals Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2552/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 43Section 43(5)

…chased in the name of director, the company cannot be denied depreciation on the same, if the asset is otherwise found to be used for the purpose of business. The decision relied upon by the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) clearly supports the stand of the assessee. We, thus, set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the motor vehicle and related expenses on motor vehicle. Accordingly, this Ground of appeal is also treated as allowed.” There has been no change in the facts in the impugned assessment year, hence…

Parmeshwar Fashions Impex Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 5(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 2803/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Shreekala Pardesi
Section 143(3)

…titular ownership that is relevant for claim of depreciation under the Income Tax Act, 1961. For this learned Mumbai bench relied on the supreme court decision of Poddar Cement Ltd (226 ITR 625) and Bombay High Court decision of Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga (201 ITR 995).” 3. The sole issue raised in the present appeal pertains to claim of 2 ITA. No. 2803//Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 depreciation of INR 7,37,523/- in respect of motor car purchased during the relevant previous year. The aforesaid claim of depreciation made by the Appellant was rejected by the Assessing Officer vide Assessment Order dated 2…

Sapphire Land Development P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-5(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 343/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Sapphire Land Development Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Central Circle – 5(4) Room No. 5, 3Rd Floor Room No. 1927, 19Th Floor Capri, Anant Kanekar Marg Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 Pan: Aaacs7785H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : None Department Represented By : Shri Ashish Kumar Deharia

Section 14ASection 23(4)

…found to have rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Edwise Consultants Pvt. Ltd. cited above. The decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal was reached after distinguishing the judicial precedents in cases reported in 201 ITR 995 (Bom), 235 ITR 158 (All) and 106 Taxman 166 (SC). The relevant extract of the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Tribunal is reproduced as under: - 7. ……………. Only because the said cars have been shown in the balance sheet or books of account as asset of the company, that does not mean that the company has become the owner of the same. As held by the S…

Sehgal Autoriders Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 10, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 162/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.162/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sehgal Autoriders Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle- 10, D-Ii, 64/6, Midc Telco Road, Pune. Chinchwad, Pune- 411019. Pan : Aafcs2240A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rishi V. Lodha Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing 25.01.2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 6, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 08.11.2017 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Hon. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeals), Pune-6 Erred In Disallowing The Depreciation Claimed For The Cars Used By The Directors For Official Work Of The Company But Ownership Documents In The Name Of Individual Director. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstance Of The Case The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeals), Pune-6 Erred In Disallowing The Interest Paid On The Purchase Of Cars.

For Appellant: Shri Rishi V. LodhaFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)

…of the vehicle. On the similar lines, the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Navdurga Transport Co., 235 ITR 158 (All.-HC) and the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga, 201 ITR 995 (Bom.-HC). 10. In the light of above legal position, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee is entitled to the depreciation under the provisions of section 32 of the Act inspite of the fact that the vehicle is registered in the name of the director of the appellant company. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addi…

Habib Textiles P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-1, Kalyan

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 485/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 Habib Textiles Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-1 1130, Habib Manzil, Nasik Road, Mohan Plaza, 1St Floor, V P Naka, Po: Bhiwandi, Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada, District- Thane - 421302 Vs. Kalyan (West), Pan: Aabch3399B Distt- Thane - 421301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalchand Choudhary (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/11/2021

For Appellant: Shri Lalchand Choudhary (AR)For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(2)

…erefore, the assessment order cannot be held as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. In support of such contention, learned Counsel relied upon the following decision:- i. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga (1993) 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) ii. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mirza Ataullaha Baig (1994) 202 ITR 291 (Bombay) iii. Shree Laxmi Estate (P) Ltd. v. ITO, Ward – 15(3)(3), Mumbai (2019) 108 taxmann.com 195 (Mumbai) iv. Mehta Equities Limited v. The ACIT 4(2), Mumbai (2016) ITA No. 570/Mum/2015 (Mumbai) 5. Learned Departmental Representative submitted, the revision or…

Dy CIT Circle-3, Thane vs. M/S Samarth Lifters Pvt Ltd., Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

ITA 6719/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.6719/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–3, Thane v/s M/s. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd. Opp. Anand Nagar Octroi Naka Naa Building, Next to Maa ……………. Respondent Niketan School, Easter Express Highway, Kopari, Thane (West) 400 601 PAN –+ AACCS6646K Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue by : Shri Sanjeev Kashyap Date of Hearing – 08.04.2021 Date of Order – 10.06.2021 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.…

Bangalore Shirts Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed

ITA 267/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bangalore Shirt Co. Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer - 6(1)(3) C/O. Shankarlal Jain &Associates Aayakar Bhavan 12, Engineer Building Queens Road, Mumbai – 400 020 265, Princess Street Mumbai – 400 002 Pan: Aaacb2193G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Mrs. Kavita P. Kaushik

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Kavita P. Kaushik

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Bangalore Shirt Co. Pvt. Ltd., v. Income Tax Officer - 6(1)(3) C/o. Shankarlal Jain &Associates Aayakar Bhavan 12, Engineer Building Queens Road, Mumbai – 400 020 265, Princess Street Mumbai – 400 002 PAN: AAACB2193G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Mrs. Kavita P. Kaushik Date of Hearing : 19.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 19.10.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the…

Bangalore Shirts Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed

ITA 266/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Bangalore Shirt Co. Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer 115, Cama Industrial Estate Ward 3(1)(2) Sun Mill Compound 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Lower Parel (W) Queens Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacb2193G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 271(1)(c)

…ied depreciation and interest on car loan. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Apex court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT [239 ITR 775] and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [201 ITR 995] allowed the claims of the assessee. 7. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the counsel for the assessee strongly placed reliance on the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In this case the depreciation was denied as the vehicle was registered…

Bangalore Shirts Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed

ITA 265/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Bangalore Shirt Co. Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer 115, Cama Industrial Estate Ward 3(1)(2) Sun Mill Compound 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Lower Parel (W) Queens Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacb2193G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 271(1)(c)

…ied depreciation and interest on car loan. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Apex court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT [239 ITR 775] and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [201 ITR 995] allowed the claims of the assessee. 7. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the counsel for the assessee strongly placed reliance on the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In this case the depreciation was denied as the vehicle was registered…

Bangalore Shirt Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed

ITA 498/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Blem/S. Bangalore Shirt Co. Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer 115, Cama Industrial Estate Ward 3(1)(2) Sun Mill Compound 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Lower Parel (W) Queens Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacb2193G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 271(1)(c)

…ied depreciation and interest on car loan. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Apex court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT [239 ITR 775] and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Dilip Singh Sardarsingh Bagga [201 ITR 995] allowed the claims of the assessee. 7. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the counsel for the assessee strongly placed reliance on the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In this case the depreciation was denied as the vehicle was registered…

Goldmohur Design and Apparel Park Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. Comm. of Income Tax - 7, Mumbai

ITA 3971/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodgoldmohar Design & Pr. Cit-7 R. No. 628, 6Th Floor, Apparel Park Ltd. 145, Goldmohar Mill, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dada Saheb Phalke Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Dadar (E), Mumbai- 400 014 Pan – Aadcg1613M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. T. Kipgen &
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…r Cement (P) ltd. (1997) 92 Taxman 541 (SC)/(1997) 226 ITR 625 (SC)/(1997) 141 CTR 67 (SC). (2) Mysore Minerals Ltd. [1999] 106 Taxman 166 (SC)/[1999] 239 ITR 775 (SC)/[1999] 156 CTR 1 (SC) (3) Dilip Singh Sardarsingg Bagga [1994] 77 Taxman 66 9Bombay)/[1993] 201 ITR 995 (Bombay) (4) Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. [2002] 123 Taxman 693 (Delhi)/[2002] 257 ITR 88 (Delhi)/[2002] 176 CTR 294 (Delhi) (5) Varanasi Auto Sales (P) Ltd. [2010] 190 Taxman 60 (Allahabad)/[2020] 326 ITR 182 (Allahabad)/[2011] 238 CTR 107 (Allahabad) (6) Trio Elevators Company (India) Ltd. [2016] 67 taxmann.com 348 (Ahmedabad - Trib.)/[2016] 157…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Samarth Lifeters Pvt .Ltd, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

ITA 6233/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.Dcit, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/S. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6Th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial To Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E).

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR
Section 2(28)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON. JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/s. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial to Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E). PAN No. AACCS 6646 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CA. Department By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR Date of hearing : 04/12/2019. Date of pronouncement : 04/12/2019. O R D E R PER RAJES…