Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-IV v. J.Patel & Co.

149 ITR 682Reported decision1984#22754 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-IV v. J.Patel & Co.

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 2458/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32(1)

…depreciation of past years\nhad to be added to depreciation of the current year and the aggregate\nunabsorbed and current year's depreciation had to be deducted from the total\nincome of the assessment year.\"\n13. In the case of CIT v. J. Patel & Co. [1984] 149 ITR 682/ 18 Taxman 204,\nthe Division Bench of our High Court endorsed with approval the case of\nMadras High Court titled as CIT v. Nagapatinam Import & Export Corpn. [1975]\n119 ITR 444/[1980] 3 Taxman 150 wherein it was held as under :-\n\"The point to be considered is whether the allowance for depreciation is to be\nequated with the loss that had bee…

ASST CIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI vs. ANIL PRINERS LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5859/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2009-10 Acit, Anil Printers Ltd. Circle-6(1), R. No.506, 2, Kakad Industrial Estate, बनाम/ 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Matunga West, Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400016 Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aacca6914C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 114JSection 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 32(2)Section 32oSection 42Section 80

…ahmaver Chemicals ( P.) Ltd. v. Second ITO [1999] 239 ITR 807 (Kar.) d) CIT v. Haryana Hotels Ltd. [2005] 276 ITR 521/148 Taxman 373 (Punj. & Har.) e) CIT v. Virmani Industries (P.) Ltd. [1995] 216 ITR 607/83 Taxman 343 (SC) f) CIT v. J. Patel & CO. [1984] 149 ITR 682/18 Taxman 204 (Delhi), g) CIT v. Nagapatinam Import & Export Corpn. [1975]119 ITR 444/[1980)3 Taxman 150 (Mad.) h) CIT v. Singh Transport Co. [1980)123 ITR 698/4 Taxman 86 (Gauhati) and i) Garden Silk Wvg. Factory v CIT [1991] 189 itr 512/56 Taxman 4K (SC) 2.5. According the newly substituted (w.e.f 01/04/2002) section 32 (2) by the Finance Ac…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOVIND NAGAR SUGAR LIMITED

ITA/164/2008HC Delhi25 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 32(2)Section 80

…added to depreciation of the current year and the aggregate unabsorbed and current year's depreciation had to be deducted from the total income of the assessment year.” 13. In the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-IV v. J.Patel & Co. [1984] 149 ITR 682, the Division Bench of our High Court endorsed with approval the case of Madras High Court titled as CIT v. Nagapatinam Import and Export Corporation [1975] 119 ITR 444 wherein it was held as under :- ITA No. 164/2008 Page 10 of 13 “The point to be considered is whether the allowance for depreciation is to be equate…