CIT v. Nahar Exports Ltd.

173 Taxmann 3High Court2008#10885 most cited

What is CIT v. Nahar Exports Ltd. authority for?

Machinery that is ready for use but not actively employed in the business can still be considered 'used for the purposes of the business' for depreciation claims, especially if it forms part of a block of assets.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nahar Exports Ltd. · 296 ITR 419 · depreciation · business purposes · passive use · active use · block of assets · ready to use

Also reported as

296 ITR 419
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest

Judgments citing CIT v. Nahar Exports Ltd.

Slr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 544/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद 'ए' बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad 'A‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री मंजूनाथ जी, माननीय लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री रवीश सूद, माननीय न्यायिक सदस्य SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.544/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) | SLR Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad. | Vs. | The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. | PAN : AAJCS5863K | | (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) | करदाता का प्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented by | राजस्व…

M/S Shriram Properties Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT-Central1, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 431/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 431/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. Ananthan, CA & Ms. Lalitha. RFor Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 431/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Shriram Properties Principal Commissioner of Limited, v. Income Tax (Central), New No.9, Lakshmi Neela Rite Chennai -1. Choice Chambers, Bazullah Road, T-Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [PAN: AAFCS-5801-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : S…

M/S Good Earth Fertilizers Company P Ltd [Chemikas Speciality LLP], Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 2[2], Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.424/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Good Earth Fertilizers- The Income Tax Officer, Co. P. Ltd., Corporate Ward-2(2), (Now Known As Chemikas Chennai. Specialty Llp), No.2, North Crescent Road, T. Nagar,Chennai-600 017. [Pan:Aasfg 6012 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R.Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा .जी, , माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.424/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.Good Earth Fertilizers- The Income Tax Officer, Co. P. Ltd., Corporate Ward-2(2), (Now known as Chemikas Chennai. Specialty LLP), No.2, North Crescent Road, T. Nagar,Chennai-600 017. [PAN:AASFG 6012 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by…

Sr Trust, Madurai vs. PCIT(Central), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 213/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.213/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s.S.R.Trust, v. The Principal Commissioner- Lake Area, Melur Road, of Income Tax (Central), Madurai-625 107. Chennai-2. [PAN: AACTS 0376 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.B.Ramakrishnan, CA ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : M…

ACIT Cirrcle-3 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Skycape Developers Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 6776/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 6776/मुं/2019("न. व .2014-15) Acit,Circle -3(3), Room No.628, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 005 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Skyscape Developers Pvt.Ltd. Shapoorji Pllonji Centre, 41/44, Minoo Desai Marg, Colaba, Mumbai – 400 005 Pan: Aajcs- 8938-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Vinod Tanwani ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Dr. K.Shivram, Sr. Advocate सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 16/12/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 10/03/2022

For Appellant: Shri Vinod TanwaniFor Respondent: Dr. K.Shivram, Sr. Advocate

…ee placed reliance on the following decisions to contend that assessee is eligible for claiming depreciation in respect of asset which is “ready to use” and “not actually used”: (i) Whittle Anderson Ltd. v. CIT, 79 ITR 613(Bom) (ii)CIT vs. Nahar Export Ltd., 296 ITR 419(P&H) (ii)DCIT v. Agile Electric Sub Assembly (P) Ltd. 188 ITD 870(Chennai)(Trib) 3.3 In respect of interest expenses, the ld.Counsel for the assessee pointed that the assessee has only claimed interest expenditure in respect of Block-C. The interest expense was allowed to the assessee in assessment year 2013-14 in assessment made under section.…

P I Industries Limited, Udaipur vs. Pr. CIT, Udaipur

ITA 4/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year:2016-17 Pi Industries Limited, Vs. Pr.Cit, Udaisagar Road, Udaipur. Udaipur-313001. Pan No. Aabcp 2183 M

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 32ASection 35(1)(iv)Section 80ISection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2016-17 PI Industries Limited, Vs. Pr.CIT, Udaisagar Road, Udaipur. Udaipur-313001. PAN No. AABCP 2183 M Assessee by Shri Amit Kothari, CA& Shri Abhinav Kothari, CA Revenue by Smt. Sanchita Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 10/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 08/09/2021 O R D E R PER:SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Pr.CIT, Udaipur dated 05/03/2021 for A.Y. 2016-17 passed u/s 263 of the…

Secure Meters Limited, Udaipur vs. Pr. CIT, Udaipur

ITA 2/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year:2016-17 Secure Meters Limited, Vs. Pr.Cit, E-Class, Pratap Nagar Udaipur. Industrial Area, Udaipur-313001. Pan No. Aaccs 8785 M

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 43ASection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2016-17 Secure Meters Limited, Vs. Pr.CIT, E-Class, Pratap Nagar Udaipur. Industrial Area, Udaipur-313001. PAN No. AACCS 8785 M Assessee by Shri Amit Kothari, CA& Shri Abhinav Kothari, CA Revenue by Smt. Sanchita Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 10/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 07/09/2021 O R D E R PER:SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Pr.CIT, Udaipur dated 25/02/2021 for A.Y. 2016-1…

M/S. Kla India Public Ltd., Delhi vs. JCIT, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3332/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR

…use" is the determinative test for claim of depreciation. Reliance is placed on the following decisions : i) CIT v. Geo Tech Construction Corporation, 244 ITR 452 (Ker) ii) CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., 206 CTR 141 (P&H) iii). CIT vs. Nahar Export Ltd., 296 ITR 419, 296 ITR 419 (P&H) iv). Capital Bus Service (P) Ltd. v. CIT, 123 ITR 404. v). CIT v. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd., 341 ITR 467 vi). CIT v. Insilco Ltd., 320 ITR 322 vii). CIT v. Radio Today Broadcasting Ltd., 382 ITR 42 (Del.) viii). CIT v. Soughern Petrochemical Industries Corpn. Ltd. 292 ITR 362 6. It was also submitted that even otherwise the ld. CI…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Yamaha Motor India Pvt. Ltd

ITA/203/2009HC Delhi19 Aug 2009
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)Section 43

…ITR 353, Commissioner of income-tax vs. Oriental Coal Ltd., 206 ITR 682 and Dineshkumar Gulabchand Agrawal vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax and Anr., 267 ITR 768. The counsel for the assessee relied upon Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nahar Exports Ltd., 296 ITR 419, Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Vir Khanna, 306 ITR 14. 4. The issue, therefore, needs to be looked at from two perspectives, firstly, whether passive use is included in the expression “used for the purposes of the business” and, secondly, whether there is at all any need of use of machinery for the business when machinery has been discar…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Yamaha Motor India P.Ltd

ITA - 60 / 2009HC Delhi09 Jul 2009
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iii)Section 43Section 43(6)(c)Section 50(2)

…l, 290 ITR 353, Commissioner of income-tax vs. Oriental Coal Ltd., 206 ITR 682 and Dineshkumar Gulabchand Agrawal vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax and Anr., 267 ITR 768. The counsel for the assessee relied upon Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nahar Exports Ltd., 296 ITR 419, Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Vir Khanna, 306 ITR 14. - 4. The issue, therefore, needs to be looked at from two perspectives, firstly, whether passive use is included in the expression "used for the purposes of the business" and, secondly, whether there is at all any need of use of machinery for the business when machinery has been discarded in…

CIT v. Nahar Exports Ltd. (173 Taxmann 3) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax