CIT v. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers (P) Ltd: 226 ITR 864 and JCIT v. Anatronics Genral Company (P) Limited

247 ITR 25High Court2001#23938 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2012.

Judgments citing CIT v. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers (P) Ltd: 226 ITR 864 and JCIT v. Anatronics Genral Company (P) Limited

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Co. Ltd

The Appeals are disposed of in the above terms without any order on costs

ITA-18/1999HC Delhi31 Oct 2012

…s and Indus. Overseas Projects, did consider the matter in detail. The Court also took into consideration, the other judgments of the Rajasthan and Madras High Courts. It took note of a previous judgment in JCIT Vs. Anatronics General Co. (P) Ltd. (2001) 247 ITR 25, where the assessee company used to supply bottles. The Court upheld the contention that each bottle constituted plant and was eligible for 100% depreciation. In view of this settled position and also having regard to the fact that in any event, the value of the shuttering in the present case would have been written off within a couple of ye…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S G.E.Capital Services India

The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid

ITA-957/2006HC Delhi30 Apr 2010
For Appellant: Ms P. L. BansalFor Respondent: Mr M. S. Syali, Sr Advocate with
Section 147

…ich are comprised in the proposed questions (d) and (e), have already been settled by several decisions including decisions of this Court in the case of CIT v. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers (P) Ltd: 226 ITR 864 and JCIT v. Anatronics Genral Company (P) Limited: 247 ITR 25 (Del). The question which had arisen in those decisions was whether one bottle was to be treated as an individual asset or the entire bulk of bottles was to be treated as one asset for the purposes of computing depreciation. This Court held that each bottle is to be treated as an individual asset and since the price of each bottle was less…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S G.E.Capital Services India

The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid

ITA/957/2006HC Delhi30 Apr 2010
For Appellant: Ms P. L. BansalFor Respondent: Mr M. S. Syali, Sr Advocate with
Section 147

…ich are comprised in the proposed questions (d) and (e), have already been settled by several decisions including decisions of this Court in the case of CIT v. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers (P) Ltd: 226 ITR 864 and JCIT v. Anatronics Genral Company (P) Limited: 247 ITR 25 (Del). The question which had arisen in those decisions was whether one bottle was to be treated as an individual asset or the entire bulk of bottles was to be treated as one asset for the purposes of computing depreciation. This Court held that each bottle is to be treated as an individual asset and since the price of each bottle was less…

CIT v. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers (P) Ltd: 226 ITR 864 and JCIT v. Anatronics Genral Company (P) Limited (247 ITR 25) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax