What is ICDS Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee engaged in the business of hire purchase or leasing, being the lessor, is entitled to claim depreciation on assets leased out, even if the assets are registered in the name of the lessee and used by the lessee.

How many judgments cite ICDS Ltd. v. CIT?

280 judgments on BharatTax cite ICDS Ltd. v. CIT (350 ITR 527), spanning 2013 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 158A(1), Section 24.

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT (350 ITR 527)

DCIT vs. Sharp Software Def. India Pvt. Ltd

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

ITA 1826/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodiait(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.1819/Bang/2013 M/S. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner Of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-12(3), 14/3, 4Th Floor, Unit-5, Level-3, Innovator International Tech Park, Rastrothana Bhavan (Opp. Whitefield Road, Rbi), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560066. Bengaluru-560001. Pan: Aaecs0269E No.1826/Bang/2013 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Sharp Software 2004-05 Income-Tax, Development India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-12(3), Pan: Aaecs0269E Bengaluru-560001. C.O. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 9/Bang/2016 M/S. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner Of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Income-Tax, (In It(Tp)A Ltd., Circle-12(3), No.1819/Bang/2013) Pan: Aaecs0269E Bengaluru-560001. Revenue By : Smt. H. L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri. Chavali Narayan, Ca

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.1819/Bang/2013 M/s. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-12(3), 14/3, 4th Floor, Unit-5, Level-3, Innovator International Tech Park, Rastrothana Bhavan (Opp. Whitefield Road, RBI), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560066. Bengaluru-560001. PAN: AAECS0269E No.1826/Bang/2013 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Sharp Software 2004-05 Income-Tax, Development India Pvt. Ltd., Circ…

Sharp Software Development India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT

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

ITA 1819/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodiait(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.1819/Bang/2013 M/S. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner Of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-12(3), 14/3, 4Th Floor, Unit-5, Level-3, Innovator International Tech Park, Rastrothana Bhavan (Opp. Whitefield Road, Rbi), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560066. Bengaluru-560001. Pan: Aaecs0269E No.1826/Bang/2013 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Sharp Software 2004-05 Income-Tax, Development India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-12(3), Pan: Aaecs0269E Bengaluru-560001. C.O. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 9/Bang/2016 M/S. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner Of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Income-Tax, (In It(Tp)A Ltd., Circle-12(3), No.1819/Bang/2013) Pan: Aaecs0269E Bengaluru-560001. Revenue By : Smt. H. L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri. Chavali Narayan, Ca

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years No.1819/Bang/2013 M/s. Sharp Software Dy. Commissioner of 2004-05 Development India Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-12(3), 14/3, 4th Floor, Unit-5, Level-3, Innovator International Tech Park, Rastrothana Bhavan (Opp. Whitefield Road, RBI), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560066. Bengaluru-560001. PAN: AAECS0269E No.1826/Bang/2013 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Sharp Software 2004-05 Income-Tax, Development India Pvt. Ltd., Circ…

DCIT, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Prompt Infotech (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1485/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1485/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-2, -Vs.- M/S Prompt Infotech P.Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 5237 C] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri B.K.Poddar, Fca Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2017. Order

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri B.K.Poddar, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 65(12)

…s also submitted that no such disallowance was made in the scrutiny assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act for the Asst Year 2006-07. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd vs CIT reported in 350 ITR 527 (SC) which squarely fits into the facts of the assessee’s case and accordingly claimed that it was entitled for depreciation on assets given on lease. The ld CITA deleted the disallowance of depreciation on computers in the sum of Rs 34,37,133/- by making the following observations :- “It is seen from the facts in the Appellant's case that the su…

You Broadband & Cable India Ltd ( Formerly Knwon As You Telecom India P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in A

ITA 8409/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 194JSection 40Section 80

…ed AR submitted that the lessor has been allowed depreciation as owner of the assets and hence lease rental paid by the assessee is allowable as deduction. Learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. ( 350 ITR 527). 11. We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. We noticed that the tax authorities have not examined the lease agreement. The assessee submits that the lessor, viz., M/s Cisco Systems Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd. has been allowed depreciation as owner of the asset and hence lease rental paid by the assessee should b…

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment year 1999-

ITA 4455/MUM/2014[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2017AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 1999-2000 The Dcit-2(3), M/S Tata Chemicals Ltd., R. No. 552, 5Th Floor, Bombay House, Aayakar Bhavan, 24, Homi Modi Street, Fort, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaact4059M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. A. Jaikaran (DR)For Respondent: Sh. Dinesh Vyas (AR)

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148Section 80I

…iled by the revenue hence the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from the order of the ITAT, Mumbai passed in L & T Pvt. Ltd. (supra) placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed I.C.D.S Ltd. Vs. CIT 2013 350 ITR 527, Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Apollo Invest (I) Ltd. 2016 382 ITR 0033 order by ITAT, Mumbai passed in Bombay Dyeing and Manufacture Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-8, ITA No. 4599-Mumbai 2002 for the Assessment Year 1996-97 and other cases to substantiate the claim of the assessee. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and also p…

M/S. Kailash Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3034/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 22Section 234BSection 24

…l estate and rent is received from letting out buildings, furniture and fixture. P& M etc. Therefore, he argued that such income should be assessed under business head only. He relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of I.C.D.S. Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527 (SC), that for granting depreciation there is no requirement of usage of asset by assessee himself. I have considered the arguments of Ld. AR. I agree in principle with the arguments of Ld. AR that disallowance of depreciation should be restricted to the depreciation as the property from which the rent is received. In the assessment order, detail…

DCIT 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ald Automotive P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3303/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, J.M. & Shri Ashawani Taneja, A.M

For Appellant: - Shri Rahul Raman,(CIT D.R.)For Respondent: - Shri Brijmohan Pooranmal Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(3)Section 32

…AY 2007-08 and 2008-09 dated 25/07/2016 and in AY 2009-10 dated 20/07/2016 wherein the Tribunal has held as under: “We find that, as observed by the learned CIT(A), that the issue is covered by the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in ICDS Ltd. vs. CIT (2013) 350 ITR 527 wherein it has been held that section 2(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act is a deeming provision that creates a legal fiction of ownership in favour of lessee only for the purpose of the Motor Vehicle Act. It has been held there in that the lessor, the assessee was the owner of the vehicles. As the owner, it used the assets in the course of its busines…

Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 3, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2748/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd., बनधम/ Principal Commissioner Of Maker Tower E, 7Th Floor, Income Tax-6, Vs. A Wing- Cuff Parade Mumbai- 612, Aayakar Bhavan, 400005 Mk Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aabcd7169H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant By : Shri Arvind Sonde प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 3.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 20.3.2015, Passed By Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -3, Mumbai Under Section 263, Setting Aside The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 20.3.2013 For Passing It Afresh. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Ground No.1 (I) The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax- 3, (Hereinafter Referred To As Cit) Erred In Passing The Order Under Section 263 Of The Act, By Holding That The Assessment Order Passed By The Oy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -3(3), Mumbai (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “एच” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री अमभत शुक्रा, न्मायमक सदस्म एवं श्री याजेशकुभाय, रेखा सदस्म के सभक्ष । BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Reliance Corporate IT Park Ltd., बनधम/ Principal Commissioner of Maker Tower E, 7th floor, Income Tax-6, Vs. A Wing- Cuff Parade Mumbai- 612, Aayakar Bhavan, 400005 MK Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AABCD7169H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant by : Shri…

Sanjay G Vadodaria, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4419/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Sanjay G. Vadodaria, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 29/B Roop Kamal 426, S.V. 25(3)(4), Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400067 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaepv9502A यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Mrs. Zarna P. Chandwani & Mr. Pradeep Chandwani याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri Vishwas Mundhe-Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

Section 32oSection 42

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ, ई, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI श्री जोगगन्दय स िंह, न्मायमक दस्म एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रधान, रेखा दस्म, के भक्ष Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/s Sanjay G. Vadodaria, Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ 29/B Roop Kamal 426, S.V. 25(3)(4), Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400067 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. AAEPV9502A यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee by Mrs. Zarna P. Chandwani & Mr. Pradeep Chandwani याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by Shri Vishwas…

Sbi Capital Markets Ltd vs. DCIT Sp RG 3

ITA 9044/MUM/1992[1989-90]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2017AY 1989-90

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitesh Joshi and N.A. ParadeFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S Naik-CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…he assets nor had to gone to the lessees premises for verification of existence of the asset,that the High Court proceedings,including the report of the CR,were primary evidence to show existence of the assets. The AR relied upon the decision of I.C.D.S. Ltd.(350 ITR 527) of the Hon’ble Apex Court and contended that the Hon’ble Court had held that the assessee was entitled to claim depreciation since it was the owner of the assets so leased. 2.4.1.The Departmental Representative(DR)argued that the assessee had issued bearer cheques to the employees of the lessees,that one of the insurance policy document stated…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, both the assessee's appeal as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed

ITA 191/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…as income. The lessor, who is the legal owner of the asset, is entitled to claim depreciation under the provisions of the Act. 5.5 The aforesaid legal position finds support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527/212 Taxman 550/29 taxmann.com 129, wherein the Hon'ble Court held that the lessor is the owner of the leased property in case of finance lease, entitled to depreciation of the same. The pertinent observation of the Hon'ble Court is reproduced hereunder : "The revenue's objection to the claim of the assessee is founded on the lease agreement. It a…

ADIT (It) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Valentine Maritime (Gulf) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, insofar as appeal of Revenue is concerned, the same is dismissed

ITA 9239/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Joginder Singh: (A.Y : 2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 44Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…are with first leg contractors but whose services or facilities or plant and machinery are used in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of, mineral oils as required under section 44BB. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Ltd v CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 held that the assessee leasing the vehicles to others who use the said vehicles in their business of running them on hire is entitled for higher rate of depreciation on the vehicles given on lease. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the lessor need not himself use the vehicles in the business of running them on hire. The rationale of t…

Valentine Maritime (Gulf) Llc, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, insofar as appeal of Revenue is concerned, the same is dismissed

ITA 8694/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Joginder Singh: (A.Y : 2007-08)

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 44Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

…are with first leg contractors but whose services or facilities or plant and machinery are used in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of, mineral oils as required under section 44BB. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Ltd v CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 held that the assessee leasing the vehicles to others who use the said vehicles in their business of running them on hire is entitled for higher rate of depreciation on the vehicles given on lease. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the lessor need not himself use the vehicles in the business of running them on hire. The rationale of t…

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT Spl. RG. - 2, Mumbai

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 7148/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR

Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

Tata Motors Ltd vs. DCIT RG - 2(1)

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR

Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

Jm Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), Mumbai

Accordingly dismissed. However, in view of our findings given above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 3654/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. J.M. Financial Services The Joint Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax (Osd)-4(3), (Formerly Jm Financial Room No.635, Services Pvt. Ltd.), Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 7Th Floor, Cnergy, M.K. Road, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 Pan: Aaacj5977A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri, D.R

Section 14A

…tted that the Tribunal in appeal relating to A.Y. 2007 – 08 vide order dated 28.06 2013 has restored the matter back to the file of the AO directing it to be decided in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “ICDS v. CIT” (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) . Following the same line, the tribunal in assessee’s appeal relating to AY -2008-09 vide order dated 28.2.2014 has again restored the matter to the file of the AO with direction to decide the same as per the directions given by the Tribunal in order dated 28. 06 2013 for AY 2007-08. Since the issue involved and the material facts relevant t…

B J Services Co. Middle East Ltd., Dehradun vs. ADIT(Intl. Taxation), Dehradun

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3889/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amil Arora, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT/DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 271BSection 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

…are with first leg contractors but whose services or facilities or plant and machinery are used in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of, mineral oils as required under section 44BB. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Ltd v CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 held that the assessee leasing the vehicles to others who use the said vehicles in their business of running them on hire is entitled for higher rate of depreciation on the 10 ITA No.3889/Del./2010, 421 & 4831/Del./2012 vehicles given on lease. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the lessor need not himself use the vehicles in the busi…

V-Tex Wvg & Mfg Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 1393/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. V-Tex Wvg & Mfg Mills Ltd. D C I T – 4(3)(2) Office No. A 313, Ahura Centre Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 82, Mahakali Caves Road M.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai 400093 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aabcv7931K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri M.B. SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 40

…2013 wherein we have followed the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. Padmshree Weaving & Mfg. Mills Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 6570/M/2013 wherein the Tribunal has followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd Vs CIT 350 ITR 527. Respectfully following our own decision, we direct the AO to allow the claim of depreciation. Ground No. 1 is accordingly allowed. 5.2.2 Following the aforesaid decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 (supra), which followed the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. vs.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bio Rad Laboratories (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2384/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Raj, Sr. DR

…he assessee. 17. The ld Departmental Representative relied upon the order of the AO whereas the ld Authorised Representative relied upon the order of the ld CIT(A) and also placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 29 Taxmann.com 129. The ld Authorised Representative further relied upon the decision of coordinate bench in ITA No. 482/Del/2009 AY 2004-05 dated 18.02.2010. 18. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. The coordinate bench has considered the identical issue wherein depreciation was allowed on machineries which are installed at the manufacturing…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 13/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…the parties and have perused the record of the case. The main plank of ld. Sr. counsel’s submission is that in AY 2000-01 and 2002-03, this issue was remanded to AO by Tribunal for examining the terms of agreement as obtaining in the case of ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527 and after examining both the agreements the AO allowed the claim of assessee. The Tribunal while deciding this issue for AY 2000-01 and 2002-03, inter alia, observed as under: “6. Brief' facts apropos ground no. 2 are that in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee company was asked /0 furnish the details of vehicles leased out by the…

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT