What is CIT v. VTM Ltd. authority for?

An assessee engaged in the manufacture or production of an article or thing is entitled to additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) for new machinery or plant, such as a windmill for power generation, even if it is not directly used in the primary manufacturing activity.

How many judgments cite CIT v. VTM Ltd.?

49 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. VTM Ltd. (319 ITR 336), spanning 2016 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. VTM Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10AA, Section 234B, Section 32(1)(iia), Section 32AC, Section 35(2AB), Section 80P(2)(b).

CIT v. VTM Ltd. (319 ITR 336)

Metropolis Healthcare Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), New Delhi

In the result, the claim of the deduction of dividend distribution tax made by the assessee in this additional ground is rejected

ITA 1546/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…e assessment order passed in those year he submitted that when the ld AO himself has allowed it for the earlier years it cannot be disallowed for this year. He relied on the Principles of consistency. He further relied upon the decision of the CIT Vs. VTM Ltd 319 ITR 336, decision of ITAT Bangalore in Texas Instrument Pvt. Ltd Vs. Additional CIT, ITA Nos. 144 and 169/Bang/2014, DCIT Vs. Bengal Beverages ITA No. 1218/Kol/2015 dated 06.10.2017, CIT Vs. Trinity Hotels 225 ITR 178 of Hon‟ble Rajasthan High Court and decision of the coordinate bench in Bikanerwala Foods Vs. DCIT 6357/Del/2015. He submitted that the ld…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hero Honda Motors Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6302/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

…following decisions wherein it has been held that there is no requirement under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act to establish operational connectivity of the eligible plant and machinery with the article and thing manufactured by the assessee: • CIT v. VTM Ltd: 319 ITR 336 (Mad) • CIT v. Hindustan Newsprint Ltd.: 183 Taxman 257 (Ker) • CIT v. Hi Tech Arai Ltd: 321 ITR 477 (Mad): • CIT v. Texmo Precision castings: 321 ITR 481 (Mad) • CIT vs. Diamines & Chemicals Ltd.: 271 CTR 98 (Guj) • NRB Bearings Ltd. vs. DCIT: 133 ITD 306 (Mum ITAT) 10.0 On the other hand, the Ld. CIT (DR) refuted the contentions of the assesse…

M/S. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6282/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

…following decisions wherein it has been held that there is no requirement under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act to establish operational connectivity of the eligible plant and machinery with the article and thing manufactured by the assessee: • CIT v. VTM Ltd: 319 ITR 336 (Mad) • CIT v. Hindustan Newsprint Ltd.: 183 Taxman 257 (Ker) • CIT v. Hi Tech Arai Ltd: 321 ITR 477 (Mad): • CIT v. Texmo Precision castings: 321 ITR 481 (Mad) • CIT vs. Diamines & Chemicals Ltd.: 271 CTR 98 (Guj) • NRB Bearings Ltd. vs. DCIT: 133 ITD 306 (Mum ITAT) 10.0 On the other hand, the Ld. CIT (DR) refuted the contentions of the assesse…

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 731/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(Tp)A No.731/Bang/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Vs. The Additional Commissioner Of Bagmane Tech Park, Income Tax, Ltu, No.66/3, Adjacent To Lrde, Bangalore. Byrasandra, C V Raman Nagar, Bangalore – 560 093. Pan: Aaact 5445M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sharath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit (Dr) (Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 6.1.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 7.1.2020

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 263

…achinery or plant need not be used in manufacture or IT(TP)A No. 731/Bang/2016 Page 6 of 7 production of any article or thing. The learned counsel has before us relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court High Court in the case of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd.319 ITR 336 (Madras) wherein the assessee-company was engaged in the business of manufacture of textile goods. During the relevant assessment year, it had set up a wind mill for generation of power and claimed additional depreciation thereon under section 32(1)( iia). The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the assessee was engaged only…

M/S. Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. Jaipur, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-6, Jaipur, Circle-6

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 783/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT) &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…Co. (P) Ltd. (2019) 178 DTR 53 (Del.) • Principal CIT Vs. Kanishk Steel Industries (2016) 96 CCH 0292 (Mad.) • CIT Vs. Diamines & Chemicals Ltd. (2014) 109 DTR 62 (Guj.) • JCIT Vs. Mineral Enterprises Ltd. (2013) 144 ITD 680 (Bang.) • CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 336 (Mad.) • Giriraj Enterprises Vs. DCIT (2017) 149 DTR 95 (Pune) • Sanwaria Agroils Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2017) 165 ITD 604 (Indore) 17. It was further submitted that the expression ‘article or thing’ used in section 32(1)(iia) is not defined in the IT Act, 1961. Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electrici…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S.Mineral Enterprises Ltd

ITA/619/2013HC Karnataka23 Nov 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

Section 10Section 10BSection 148Section 260

…on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to additional depreciation on Windmill by relying on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. VTM Ltd., 319 ITR 336 without appreciating 7 the fact that the Department has not accepted the said decision of the High Court of Madras and has filed SLP before the Supreme Court, which is still pending and the decision of the Madras High Court in the above case has still not become final ?” Learned counsel submits that substantial questions of law Nos.…

ACIT Cir 27(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Deepali Atul Ganatra, Mumbai

ITA 7251/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar -ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-Sr.AR-CIT

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

…7 (URO) (Delhi) (Trib.), considered this decision while dealing with the activity of generation of electricity with respect of additional depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) and ruled in favour of assessee. Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. VTM Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 336 (Mad.) (HC) examined the same issue and dismissed the revenue appeal seeking to disallow additional depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act with respect of setting up a windmill by a manufacturer of textile goods. Thus, following the ratio of VMT Ltd.(supra) issue has been decided in favour of assessee with regard to addition depreciation u/s.32(1…

Swapnali Avinash Bhosale, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal assessee is allowed

ITA 411/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Swapnali Avinash Bhosale Joint Commissioner Of (Now Swapnali Vishwajit Income Tax, Range 16(1), Kadam) Mumbai 33Rd Floor, Palladium Hotels, Vs. Phonix Mill Premises, 462, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai- 400 013 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aghpb4402E

For Appellant: BN Rao, ARFor Respondent: V Justin, DR

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Swapnali Avinash Bhosale Joint Commissioner of (Now Swapnali Vishwajit Income Tax, Range 16(1), Kadam) Mumbai 33rd Floor, Palladium Hotels, Vs. PHonix Mill Premises, 462, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai- 400 013 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AGHPB4402E Assessee by : BN Rao, AR Revenue by : V Justin, DR Date of hearing: 04-04-2018 Date of pronouncement : 11-04-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal of assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Greatshine Holdings Private Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 271/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 271/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Greatshine Holdings Private Limited, 6Th Floor, Samson Towers, Income Tax, Vs. Corporate Circle 2(1), 403L, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aadcg6913E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Mohd. Mustafa, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai Dated 28.11.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In Generator

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Mustafa, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘ए’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 271/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Greatshine Holdings Private Limited, 6th Floor, Samson Towers, Income Tax, Vs. Corporate Circle 2(1), 403L, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 008. [PAN:AADCG6913E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appella…

Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1254/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35A

…idered the submission of the assessee and also the facts available on record. In respect of claim of additional of Rs.38,62,288/- on wind mills, the assessee’s submissions is that this issue is settled in favour of the assessee in the case of CIT vs. VTM Ltd, 319 ITR 336 (Madras) It has further been contended that SLP filed against that decision has been rejected by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the case of M/s CIT vs VTM Ltd, it has been held that it is not required that the new plant and machinery installed after 31sl Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd Vs. DCIT Assessment year: 2009-10 Page 3 of 5 March, 2002 sh…

J.N Investment & Trading Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2373/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…urt in the decision reported in [2010] 321 ITR 477 (Mad) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. HI TECH ARAI LTD.). In this regard it would be relevant and pertinent to point out that the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had earlier in the case of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 336 (Mad), had upheld the order of the Tribunal and therein concluded that as the business of generation of electricity by wind mill amounts to production of an article or thing, therefore, the assessee would be entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia). The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the Hon‟ble High Court had preferred a „Sp…

Wind World Wind Resources Development P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2372/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…urt in the decision reported in [2010] 321 ITR 477 (Mad) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. HI TECH ARAI LTD.). In this regard it would be relevant and pertinent to point out that the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had earlier in the case of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 336 (Mad), had upheld the order of the Tribunal and therein concluded that as the business of generation of electricity by wind mill amounts to production of an article or thing, therefore, the assessee would be entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia). The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the Hon‟ble High Court had preferred a „Sp…

Wind World Wind Resources Development P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2371/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…urt in the decision reported in [2010] 321 ITR 477 (Mad) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. HI TECH ARAI LTD.). In this regard it would be relevant and pertinent to point out that the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had earlier in the case of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 336 (Mad), had upheld the order of the Tribunal and therein concluded that as the business of generation of electricity by wind mill amounts to production of an article or thing, therefore, the assessee would be entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia). The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the Hon‟ble High Court had preferred a „Sp…

Wind World India Infrastructure P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2370/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…urt in the decision reported in [2010] 321 ITR 477 (Mad) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. HI TECH ARAI LTD.). In this regard it would be relevant and pertinent to point out that the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had earlier in the case of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 336 (Mad), had upheld the order of the Tribunal and therein concluded that as the business of generation of electricity by wind mill amounts to production of an article or thing, therefore, the assessee would be entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia). The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the Hon‟ble High Court had preferred a „Sp…

DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2041/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Aug 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2041/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-10 Kolkata -Vs- M/S Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 3739 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Gupta, AR

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 2041/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-10 Kolkata -vs- M/s Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd. [PAN: AABCR 3739 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. CIT DR For the Respondent : Shri A.K. Gupta, AR Date of Hearing : 03.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 16 .08.2017 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -XX, Kolkata [ in short the l…

M/S. Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2468/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35DSection 41Section 41(1)

…ion U/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act, came in to effect from the assessment year 2013-14 as per Finance Act, 2012. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) also agreed to the view of the Ld.AO and upheld the order by distinguishing the decision in the case VTM Limited reported in 319 ITR 336. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the assessee had claimed additional depreciation on the windmill erected by it for generating and distribution of power in order to earn revenue. In this situation, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities on this issue. As held by the Ld.AO the business of generatio…

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S. Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2324/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35DSection 41Section 41(1)

…ion U/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act, came in to effect from the assessment year 2013-14 as per Finance Act, 2012. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) also agreed to the view of the Ld.AO and upheld the order by distinguishing the decision in the case VTM Limited reported in 319 ITR 336. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the assessee had claimed additional depreciation on the windmill erected by it for generating and distribution of power in order to earn revenue. In this situation, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities on this issue. As held by the Ld.AO the business of generatio…

Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 442/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35DSection 41Section 41(1)

…ion U/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act, came in to effect from the assessment year 2013-14 as per Finance Act, 2012. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) also agreed to the view of the Ld.AO and upheld the order by distinguishing the decision in the case VTM Limited reported in 319 ITR 336. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the assessee had claimed additional depreciation on the windmill erected by it for generating and distribution of power in order to earn revenue. In this situation, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities on this issue. As held by the Ld.AO the business of generatio…

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. Chiranjjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 319/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35DSection 41Section 41(1)

…ion U/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act, came in to effect from the assessment year 2013-14 as per Finance Act, 2012. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) also agreed to the view of the Ld.AO and upheld the order by distinguishing the decision in the case VTM Limited reported in 319 ITR 336. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the assessee had claimed additional depreciation on the windmill erected by it for generating and distribution of power in order to earn revenue. In this situation, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities on this issue. As held by the Ld.AO the business of generatio…

M/S. Sanwaria Agroils Limited, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

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

ITA 620/IND/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 32

…favour of the assessee by the aforesaid decisions of the Hon`ble Madras High Court and the coordinated bench of the Tribunal. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. 24. The learned counsel for the assessee, relied in the case of CIT v. TVM Ltd. 319 ITR 336 (Mad) wherein it was held that the additional depreciation allowed on wind mill generator to an assessee who is already engaged in the business of manufacture and production of an article or thing. 25. On the other hand, the learned Sr. D.R. relying on the decision of Clover Developer P Ltd. v. ACIT [I.T.A. No. 6422/M/2011-A.Y. 0708 dtd. 01-05-2…

CIT v. VTM Ltd.

What is CIT v. VTM Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. VTM Ltd.

Metropolis Healthcare Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hero Honda Motors Ltd., New Delhi

M/S. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

M/S. Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. Jaipur, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-6, Jaipur, Circle-6

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S.Mineral Enterprises Ltd

ACIT Cir 27(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Deepali Atul Ganatra, Mumbai

Swapnali Avinash Bhosale, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 16(1), Mumbai

DCIT, Chennai vs. Greatshine Holdings Private Limited, Chennai

Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Baroda

J.N Investment & Trading Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 2, Mumbai

Wind World Wind Resources Development P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

Wind World Wind Resources Development P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

Wind World India Infrastructure P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -2, Mumbai

DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Reliance Chemotex Industries Ltd., Kolkata

M/S. Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S. Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Coimbatore

Chiranjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. Chiranjjeevi Wind Energy Ltd., Coimbatore

M/S. Sanwaria Agroils Limited, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal