CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe

5 ITR 621High Court1937#4536 most cited

What is CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe authority for?

Depreciation allowance can be claimed for an asset even if it is not actively used in the business, as the term 'used' encompasses both passive and active user. Machinery kept idle may still depreciate.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe · 5 ITR 621 · section 32 · depreciation · idle machinery · passive use · active use · ready for use · business asset

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 80A(6)Section 80IASection 80IA(8)

Issues it is cited on

ready for usesection 32companybusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAGNUM POWER GENERATION LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2509/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)

…ly, by the assessee; and (ii) that it is used for the purposes of business or profession. Therefore an assessee on satisfaction of these to primary conditions can clam allowance for depreciation. The Bombay High Cout in CIT v. Vishwanath Bhaskar sathe, (1937) 5 ITR 621 (Bom.)held that the word 'used' should be understood in a wider sense so as to give a wider meaning and embrace passive as well as active user. The said decision was followed by the patna High Court in CIT v. Dalmia Cement Ltd., (1945) 13 ITR 415 (Pat.) wherein it was held that depre-ciation should be allowed even though machinery was not in use or…

HIMALAYAPUTRA AVIATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-11(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 7904/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 143(3)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Himalayaputra Aviation ltd. ACIT, 54JA Annexe, BasantLok, Cricle-11(2), Vasant Vihar, Vs New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110057 PAN-AACCH7900F Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Praveen Kumar, CA Revenue by Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement .07.2022 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi, dated 24.07.2019 pertaini…

ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY vs. LES ATELIERS PONDICHERRY (P) LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1870/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

…ring relevant period. This principle is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vayithiri Plantations Ltd. (supra) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe (1937) 5 ITR 621. In this case, assets were not used in business of the assessee. However, due to labour unrest, same were not put to use for manufacturing purpose for impugned assessment year. Therefore, for this reason depreciation on plant & machinery cannot be denied. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted additions made by the…

ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY vs. LES ATELIERS PONDICHERRY (P) LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1869/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

…ring relevant period. This principle is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vayithiri Plantations Ltd. (supra) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe (1937) 5 ITR 621. In this case, assets were not used in business of the assessee. However, due to labour unrest, same were not put to use for manufacturing purpose for impugned assessment year. Therefore, for this reason depreciation on plant & machinery cannot be denied. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted additions made by the…

LES ATELIERS DE PONDICHERRY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1508/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

…ring relevant period. This principle is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vayithiri Plantations Ltd. (supra) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe (1937) 5 ITR 621. In this case, assets were not used in business of the assessee. However, due to labour unrest, same were not put to use for manufacturing purpose for impugned assessment year. Therefore, for this reason depreciation on plant & machinery cannot be denied. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted additions made by the…

M/S LES ATELIERS DE PONDICHERRY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1483/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

…ring relevant period. This principle is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vayithiri Plantations Ltd. (supra) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe (1937) 5 ITR 621. In this case, assets were not used in business of the assessee. However, due to labour unrest, same were not put to use for manufacturing purpose for impugned assessment year. Therefore, for this reason depreciation on plant & machinery cannot be denied. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted additions made by the…

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 21/ALLD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD [THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.19 to 21/ALLD/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 Triveni Glass Ltd Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kanpur Road, Allahabad-211001, U.P. v. II(3), 38, M. G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad- 211001, U.P. PAN:AAACT8795L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CA Respondent by: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2021& 10.09.2021 Date of pronouncement: 14.10.2021 O R D E R PER BENCH: These threeappeals bearing I…

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 20/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD [THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.19 to 21/ALLD/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 Triveni Glass Ltd Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kanpur Road, Allahabad-211001, U.P. v. II(3), 38, M. G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad- 211001, U.P. PAN:AAACT8795L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CA Respondent by: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2021& 10.09.2021 Date of pronouncement: 14.10.2021 O R D E R PER BENCH: These threeappeals bearing I…

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 19/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD [THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.19 to 21/ALLD/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 Triveni Glass Ltd Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kanpur Road, Allahabad-211001, U.P. v. II(3), 38, M. G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad- 211001, U.P. PAN:AAACT8795L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CA Respondent by: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2021& 10.09.2021 Date of pronouncement: 14.10.2021 O R D E R PER BENCH: These threeappeals bearing I…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 893/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 893/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Income Tax, Hisar Circle, Place, New Delhi-110066 Hisar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj7079D Assessee By : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. & Ms. Pallavi Saigal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :05.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Assessing Officer U/S 143(3)/144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.10.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 893/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Income Tax, Hisar Circle, Place, New Delhi-110066 Hisar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACJ7079D Assessee by : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. & Ms. Pallavi Saigal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR Date of Hearing :05.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 29.04.2019 ORDER Per N.…

DCIT, NAJIBABAD vs. DR. SIRISH KUMAR, BIJNOR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4578/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs. Sh. Sirish Kumar, Circle – Najibabad, Prop. Shree Hospital, Kiratpur Najibabad Road, Bijnor. Pan :Apjpk1955N (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.65/Del/2016 [In Ita No.4578/Del/2015] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sh. Sirish Kumar, Vs. Dcit, Prop. Shree Hospital, Circle – Najibabad, Kiratpur Road, Bijnor. Najibabad Pan :Apjpk1955N (Appellant) (Respondent) Department By Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.Dr Assessee By Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Ca

Section 68Section 69CSection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Vs. Sh. Sirish Kumar, Circle – Najibabad, Prop. Shree Hospital, Kiratpur Najibabad Road, Bijnor. PAN :APJPK1955N (Appellant) (Respondent) And C.O. No.65/Del/2016 [In ITA No.4578/Del/2015] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sh. Sirish Kumar, Vs. DCIT, Prop. Shree Hospital, Circle – Najibabad, Kiratpur Road, Bijnor. Najibabad PAN :APJPK1955N (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR Assessee by Sh. Paramjeet Singh, CA Date of hear…

G SHOE EXPORT,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 5736/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Acit 25(1) Vs. M/S. G. Shoe Export 2Nd Floor, Bandra Kurla 1, Hitex Industrial Estate Complex, S.V.Road, Dahisar (E) Bandra Mumbai – 400 068 Mumbai – 400 081 Pan/Gir No. Aacfg5376P Appellant) Respondent) .. M/S. G. Shoe Export Vs. Acit 25(1) 2Nd 1, Hitex Industrial Estate Floor, Bandra Kurla S.V.Road, Dahisar (E) Complex, Mumbai – 400 068 Bandra Mumbai – 400 081 Pan/Gir No. Aacfg5376P Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM ACIT 25(1) Vs. M/s. G. Shoe Export 2nd Floor, Bandra Kurla 1, Hitex Industrial Estate Complex, S.V.Road, Dahisar (E) Bandra Mumbai – 400 068 Mumbai – 400 081 PAN/GIR No. AACFG5376P Appellant) Respondent) .. M/s. G. Shoe Export Vs. ACIT 25(1) 2nd 1, Hitex Industrial Estate Floor, Bandra Kurla S.V.Road, Dahisar (E) Complex, Mumbai – 400 068 Bandra Mumbai – 400 081 PAN/GIR No. AACFG5376P Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri N.R.Agrawal Revenue by Shri V.V.Vidhyadhar Date of Hearing 04/01/2018 Date of…

M/S. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…ny time. The machines were thus under forced idleness and, accordingly, liable to be considered as in use during the relevant period in-as-much as they were kept ready for use at any moment. Similar was the situation in CIT vs. Vishwanath Bhaskar Sathe [1937] 5 ITR 621 (Bom). How, we wonder, could a different view be taken; the machine being kept ready for use at any moment. They were surely deployed in business, and their being put to actual use being a contingency over which they had no control and, further, which could arise at any time. In fact, the identity of the machines which were idle and which worked wo…

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

…Act') corresponding to section 32 of the 6 ITA No.3332/Del./2014 1961 Act has to be given a wider meaning. The expression includes passive as well as active user. In CIT v. Dalmia Cement Ltd [19451 13 ITR 415 (Pat.) and CIT v. Wisvanath Bhaskar Sathe [1937] 5 ITR 621 (Bom.), it was observed that depreciation might be allowed in certain cases even though the machinery was not in use or was kept idle. The question whether the word 'used' would include both passive as well as active user was left open by the Apex Court in Liquidators of Pursa Ltd, v. CIT [1954] 25 ITR 265 . The word 'used' for the purposes of the…

M/S. EASTERN SUGAR & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee on grounds No

ITA 1951/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1950/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-2005) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1951/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-2007) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pinaki Mukherji, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2004-2005 & 2006-07, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-I, Kolkata, In Appeal No.434/Cc-Iv/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 05.08.2010 & Appeal No.433/Cc-Xi/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 11.08.2010, Respectively Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer M/S. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. (Ao) Under Section 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherji, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…,' it is sufficient if the machinery in question is M/s. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. employed by the assessee for the purposes of the business and for no other business and it is kept by him ready for actual use.” • CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe [(1937) 5 ITR 621] [Bombay High Court]: In this case, the Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee was entitled to depreciation notwithstanding that the plant and machinery did not actually work during the previous year in question. The court, while holding so, interpreted the word "used" found in section 10(2)(vi) of the 1922 Act, as under: "But, I think that th…

M/S. EASTERN SUGAR & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - XI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee on grounds No

ITA 1950/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1950/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-2005) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1951/Kol/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-2007) M/S Eastern Sugar & Vs. Acit, Cc-Xi, Kolkata, Industries Ltd., C/O M/S Poddar Court Building, Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, 18, Rabindra Sarani, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- Kolkata-700001 700072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2944 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pinaki Mukherji, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2004-2005 & 2006-07, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central-I, Kolkata, In Appeal No.434/Cc-Iv/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 05.08.2010 & Appeal No.433/Cc-Xi/Cit(A),C-I/08-09, Dated 11.08.2010, Respectively Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer M/S. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. (Ao) Under Section 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherji, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…,' it is sufficient if the machinery in question is M/s. Eastern Sugar & Industries Ltd. employed by the assessee for the purposes of the business and for no other business and it is kept by him ready for actual use.” • CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe [(1937) 5 ITR 621] [Bombay High Court]: In this case, the Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee was entitled to depreciation notwithstanding that the plant and machinery did not actually work during the previous year in question. The court, while holding so, interpreted the word "used" found in section 10(2)(vi) of the 1922 Act, as under: "But, I think that th…

DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN REFRIGERATOR CO. LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenues’ appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 941/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri T.A.Khan

…ny time. The machines were thus under forced idleness and, accordingly, liable to be considered as in use during the relevant period in-as-much as they were kept ready for use at any moment. Similar was the situation in CIT vs. Vishwanath Bhaskar Sathe [1937] 5 ITR 621 (Bom). How, we wonder, could a different view be taken; the machine being kept ready for use at any moment. They were surely deployed in business, and their being put to actual use being a contingency over which they had no control and, further, which could arise at any time. In fact, the identity of the machines which were idle and which worked wo…

INDIAN REGRIGERATOR COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenues’ appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3949/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri T.A.Khan

…ny time. The machines were thus under forced idleness and, accordingly, liable to be considered as in use during the relevant period in-as-much as they were kept ready for use at any moment. Similar was the situation in CIT vs. Vishwanath Bhaskar Sathe [1937] 5 ITR 621 (Bom). How, we wonder, could a different view be taken; the machine being kept ready for use at any moment. They were surely deployed in business, and their being put to actual use being a contingency over which they had no control and, further, which could arise at any time. In fact, the identity of the machines which were idle and which worked wo…

ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI vs. G SHOES EXPORTS, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6209/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5736/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) G. Shoes Exports Asst. Cit-25(1)/Cit City 25 बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, 1, Hitex Industrial Estate, S. V. Road, Dahisar (E), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Mumbai-400 068 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfg 5376 P (Assessee) : (Revenue) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6209/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-25(1), G. Shoes Exports Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 068 Vs. (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Radheshyam Jain : Shri Airiju Jaikaran Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.06.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 16.7.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 20.3.2013. 2

For Appellant: Shri Radheshyam Jain
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)

…ny time. The machines were thus under forced idleness and, accordingly, liable to be considered as in use during the relevant period in-as-much as they were kept ready for use at any moment. Similar was the situation in CIT vs. Vishwanath Bhaskar Sathe [1937] 5 ITR 621 (Bom). How, we wonder, could a different view be taken; the machine being kept ready for use at any moment. They were surely deployed in business, and their being put to actual use being a contingency over which they had no control and, further, which 4 ITA Nos. 5736 & 6209/M/2014 (A.Y. 2010-11) G. Shoes Exports could arise at any time. In fact, th…

COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/s. OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.

ITA-161/2006HC Delhi24 Dec 2010

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.161 of 2006 with ITA No. 617 of 2006 ITA No. 998 of 2008 ITA No.1104 of 2008 ITA No. 1283 of 2008 Reserved On: OCTOBER 27, 2010. % Pronounced On: DECEMBER 24, 2010. 1) ITA No.161 of 2006 COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX . . . Appellant through : Mr. N.P. Sahni, Advocate and Ms. P.L. Bansal, Advocate. VERSUS M/s. OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD. . . .Respondent through: Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe (5 ITR 621) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax