CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd.

359 ITR 369High Court2013#8125 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also reported as

215 Taxmann 151

Issues it is cited on

section 100profit split methodbright line testresale price methodsection 36(l)(va)amp expendituresection 92esection 92(1)cost plus methodfar analysiscorporate guaranteeright to receive

Judgments citing CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd.

INCOME TAX OFFICER , CHENNAI vs. SUNEDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1028/CHNY/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1028/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sunedison Solar Power India Private Corporate Ward 6(1), Room No. 704, Limited, No. 6J, Century Plaza,560- Wanaparthy Block, Aayakar Bhawan, 565, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 040 Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aascs6905K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.02.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of Four Days. The Revenue Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Explaining Reasons For The Said Delay & Prayed For Condonation Of That Delay. On Perusal Of The Condonation Petition & Upon Hearing Both The Parties, We Find That The 2

For Appellant: Shri Aroon Prasad, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Gupta, Advocate
Section 144BSection 147Section 260A

…lanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Consequently, goodwill is an asset as per Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act and eligible for depreciation. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. [2013] 359 ITR 369 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Limited (supra) and held that depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits. 13. In the light of factual and legal background, if it is examined the facts, there is no dispute with regard to…

M/S. SUN EDITION SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 6 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 570/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 32(1)

…lanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Consequently, goodwill is an asset as per Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act and eligible for depreciation. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. [2013] 359 ITR 369 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Limited (supra) and held that depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits. 13. In the light of factual and legal background, if it is examined the facts, there is no dispute with regard t…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-6(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 427/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 32(1)

…lanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Consequently, goodwill is an asset as per Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act and eligible for depreciation. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. [2013] 359 ITR 369 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Limited (supra) and held that depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits. 13. In the light of factual and legal background, if it is examined the facts, there is no dispute with regard t…

M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 2164/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 32(1)

…lanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Consequently, goodwill is an asset as per Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act and eligible for depreciation. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. [2013] 359 ITR 369 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Limited (supra) and held that depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits. 13. In the light of factual and legal background, if it is examined the facts, there is no dispute with regard t…

M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1520/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 32(1)

…lanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act. Consequently, goodwill is an asset as per Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) of the Act and eligible for depreciation. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. [2013] 359 ITR 369 (Kar), wherein, the Hon’ble High Court followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Limited (supra) and held that depreciation is allowable on amount paid for goodwill being future profits. 13. In the light of factual and legal background, if it is examined the facts, there is no dispute with regard t…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAJEEV AJMERA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 44A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS.SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIB.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: ABGPA4930L CO No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising out of ITA No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, DCIT-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: ABGPA4930L Assessee by Shri Mahendra Mittal, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, S…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3241 & 6525/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C ITA Nos.3114 & 6256/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Addl. CIT, Vs. Dabur India Ltd., Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Rohit Jain,…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3241 & 6525/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C ITA Nos.3114 & 6256/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Addl. CIT, Vs. Dabur India Ltd., Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Rohit Jain,…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3241 & 6525/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C ITA Nos.3114 & 6256/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Addl. CIT, Vs. Dabur India Ltd., Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Rohit Jain,…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : I-2 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3241 & 6525/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Dabur India Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT, Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C ITA Nos.3114 & 6256/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 Addl. CIT, Vs. Dabur India Ltd., Punjabi Bhawan, 4th Floor, Range-10, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. PAN : AAACD0474C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Rohit Jain,…

M/S. PIK STUDIOS P. LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS PIK PEN PRIVATE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 6681/MUM/2018[1999-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2020AY 1999-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh.

Section 154Section 32Section 43(1)

…td. (2013) 359 ITR 70 (Del) - there is transfer on amalgamation. Hence, assesse entitled to depreciation on asset acquired under amalgamation, though depreciation was not allowable to amalgamating company. b) CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 359 ITR 369 (Karn) - assesse entitled to depreciation on revalued amount. c) In De Nora India Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 370 ITR 391 (Delhi)(HC) Acquisition of entire business including assets and liabilities for a lump sum amount. Depreciation is allowable on the basis of valuation. 3) Decision relied upon by the CIT(A) in United Breweries Ltd v ACIT (2016) 76 ta…

M/S VOLVO INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1537/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153(1)Section 18

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.1537/Bang/2012 Assessment year : 2008-09 M/s. Volvo India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Yelchenahalli Village, Income Tax (LTU), Tavareker Post, Hoskote, Bangalore. Bangalore – 562 122. PAN: AAACV 6747N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, CA Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 30.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 O R D E R Per N V Vasudeva…

HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1099/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year : 2012-13 Huntsman International (India) Acit 10(1)(1), Private Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Light Hall B-Wing, Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 072

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “K”, MUMBAI Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year : 2012-13 Huntsman International (India) ACIT 10(1)(1), Private Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Light Hall B-Wing, Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 072 PAN AAACH9149J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri F V Irani Respondent By : Shri Rignesh Das Date of Hearing :04.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 12.09.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated 17.01.2017…

HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, that of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5637/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S.Huntsman International (India) Private Limited, B-Wing, Lighthall, Hiranandani Business Park, Saki Vihar Road, Mumbai 400 072 Pan: Aaach9149J ...... Appellant Vs. The Dcit, 10(1)(1), Mumbai. .... Respondent The Dcit, 10(1)(1), Mumbai. ..... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S.N.SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri N.K.Chand
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271Section 32Section 32(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s.Huntsman International (India) Private Limited, B-Wing, Lighthall, Hiranandani Business Park, Saki Vihar Road, Mumbai 400 072 PAN: AAACH9149J ...... Appellant Vs. The DCIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai. .... Respondent The DCIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai. ..... Appellant Vs. M/s.Huntsman International (India) Private Limited, B-Wing, Lighthall, Hiranandani Business Park, Saki Vihar Road, Mumbai 400 072 PAN: AAACH9149J ...... Appellant Assessee by : Shri S.N.Soparkar Revenue by : Sh…

CIT v. Manipal Universal Learning (P.) Ltd. (359 ITR 369) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax