ICDS Ltd. v. CIT

350 ITR 527Supreme Court of India2013#280 most cited

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.

280

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ICDS Ltd v CIT · 350 ITR 527 · depreciation on leased assets · lessor claim depreciation · finance lease · hire purchase · business income deduction · section 37(1) · section 32 · owner for depreciation

Also reported as

29 Taxmann.com 129212 Taxmann 550

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 158A(1)Section 24Section 35DDASection 36(1)(vii)

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on leased assetsrecognised provident fundsection 2(26)section 36(2)(i)section 129(1)section 35ddasection 50bsection 158asection 43b(f)approved gratuity fundsection 40a(9)section 4a

Judgments citing ICDS Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ge Money Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5854/DEL/2011[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…

Ge Money Financial Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4235/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

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…

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

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4206/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

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…

Ge Countrywide Consumer Financial Services Ltd vs. DCIT, Circle-12(1)

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1357/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2001-2002

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…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 3606/Mum/2014 for the assessment year 2002-03 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 3606/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri A Ramachandran
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

….07.2014 in assessee’s own case has allowed the claim of the assessee for depreciation on assets given on ‘sale and lease back basis’ for the assessment year 1995-96 to 1999-00 following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Limited v. CIT 350 ITR 527(SC). It was also submitted that the Tribunal has vide common order dated 19/03/2015 in ITA No. 5283- 5285/Mum/2012 for assessment years 1995-96 to 1997-98 in assessee’s own case deleted the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Revenue on disallowance the claim of depreciation on assets given on ‘sale and lease back basis’. All the afore…

M/S Om Welfare Society, Hisar vs. ITO, Hisar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1583/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…thority with the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment on the basis of mere change of opinion would amount to conferring an arbitrary power on the assessing authority. In our objection letter, we relied on the following cases also:- -I.C.D.S. LTD V. CIT[2013] 350 ITR 527[SC] - CIT V. INDIAN RARE EARTHS LTD. [2015] 374 ITR 104 [Bombay] -C1T V. HIGH ENERGY BATTERIES (INDIA) LTD 348 ITR 574 [MAD] [2012] -MC Dowell and Co Ltd V. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 [SC] 5 Om Welfare Society -Union of India V. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 [SC] -Parveen P Bharuch V. DCIT 348 ITR 325 [Bombay] [2012] -Asian Paint Ltd V. DC…

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

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 907/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 907 & 109/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle 3(1), बनाम/ 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber Iv, Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafca 0924 K (Assessee) (Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2179 & 601/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) Dy. Cit, Circle 3(1), Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber Iv, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafca 0924 K (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Brijmohan P. Agarwal Revenue By : Shri B. B. Rajendra Prasad सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 26.4.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 25.7.2016 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, For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2007-08 & 2008-09, U/S. 253 Of (A.Ys. 2007-08 & 2008-09) Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter), Arising Out Of The Orders By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 31.12.2012. The Appeals Raise Two Issues, One Brought By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue, I.E., With Regard To: A) Depreciation On Lease Assets; & B) Transfer (Of A Part) Of Fleet Management Charges To Maintenance Accounts

For Appellant: Shri Brijmohan P. AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri B. B. Rajendra Prasad
Section 253

…p are not transferred, and what is granted (to the lessee) is a mere right of user. The registration of the vehicle in the name of the lessee is only for the purposes of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Reliance is placed before us on I.C.D.S Ltd. vs. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 (SC) and Mysore Minerals Ltd. (supra). The ownership clause unequivocally states the intent that the vehicle shall be at all material times the property of the lessor. And, further, that the lessee shall be fully liable and responsible for all the obligations, liabilities and duties as per the Motor Vehicles Act or under any other law or instrume…

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

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2179/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 907 & 109/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle 3(1), बनाम/ 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber Iv, Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafca 0924 K (Assessee) (Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2179 & 601/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) Dy. Cit, Circle 3(1), Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber Iv, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafca 0924 K (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Brijmohan P. Agarwal Revenue By : Shri B. B. Rajendra Prasad सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 26.4.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 25.7.2016 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, For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2007-08 & 2008-09, U/S. 253 Of (A.Ys. 2007-08 & 2008-09) Ald Automotive Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter), Arising Out Of The Orders By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 31.12.2012. The Appeals Raise Two Issues, One Brought By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue, I.E., With Regard To: A) Depreciation On Lease Assets; & B) Transfer (Of A Part) Of Fleet Management Charges To Maintenance Accounts

For Appellant: Shri Brijmohan P. AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri B. B. Rajendra Prasad
Section 253

…p are not transferred, and what is granted (to the lessee) is a mere right of user. The registration of the vehicle in the name of the lessee is only for the purposes of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Reliance is placed before us on I.C.D.S Ltd. vs. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 (SC) and Mysore Minerals Ltd. (supra). The ownership clause unequivocally states the intent that the vehicle shall be at all material times the property of the lessor. And, further, that the lessee shall be fully liable and responsible for all the obligations, liabilities and duties as per the Motor Vehicles Act or under any other law or instrume…

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

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3173/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle 3(1)(1) M/S. Ald Automotive P. Ltd. Room No. 607, 6Th Floor 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iv बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point Vs. Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aafca0924K

Section 2(3)Section 32

…45 ITR 428 (SC), CIT vs BHEL, 239 ITR 756, CIT vs Bank of India, 218 ITR 371 and CIT vs IBM, 161 ITR 673 (Bom).” 2.2 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…

DCIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross-objection of the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 6585/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Smt. Beena A. Pillai Smt. Beena A. Pillaismt. Beena A. Pillai Smt. Beena A. Pillai

Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI BENCH ‘ ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND , JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No 6585/Del/2014 ITA…

M/S. Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 440/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Shri Gautam SwarupFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…alled upon to explain as to why depreciation on the leased vehicles be not disallowed as the leased transactions were, in fact, financial transactions, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. vs. CIT (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) to contend that it would be entitled to 28 claim depreciation. The AO perused the relevant clauses of lease agreement entered into by the assessee with lessors and found that the vehicles were directly delivered to the lessees who were bearing the insurance and holding warranty and also retaining the right to the exclusion of even the lesso…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Tidewater Marine International Inc., Dehradun

ITA 5927/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Arora, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT DR
Section 44BSection 44DSection 5Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5864/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) Tidewater Marine International Inc., vs. ADIT, C/o Nangia & Company, International Taxation, Suite 4A, Plaza M – 6, New Delhi. Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025. (PAN : AAACT7573Q) ITA No.5927/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ADIT, vs. Tidewater Marine International Inc., International Taxation, C/o Nangia & Company, New Delhi. Suite 4A, Plaza M – 6, Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025. (PAN : AAACT7573Q) (APPELLANT) (RESP…

Tidewater Marine International Inc, New Delhi vs. ADIT, Dehradun

ITA 5864/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Arora, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT DR
Section 44BSection 44DSection 5Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5864/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) Tidewater Marine International Inc., vs. ADIT, C/o Nangia & Company, International Taxation, Suite 4A, Plaza M – 6, New Delhi. Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025. (PAN : AAACT7573Q) ITA No.5927/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ADIT, vs. Tidewater Marine International Inc., International Taxation, C/o Nangia & Company, New Delhi. Suite 4A, Plaza M – 6, Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025. (PAN : AAACT7573Q) (APPELLANT) (RESP…

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

In the result ground, no

ITA 6282/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C

…final order hence assesse is in appeal on this ground. 8. In appeal before us, the ld. AR of the assessee contended that now this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd vs. CIT 350 ITR 527. It was further submitted that no disallowance has been made by the AO himself for Assessment Year 2011-12 where the claim of the assessee was made in the return of income. Therefore, in subsequent years revenue has accepted the claim of the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that disallowance may please be deleted. 9. The ld.DR supported the orde…

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

In the result ground, no

ITA 5882/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C

…final order hence assesse is in appeal on this ground. 8. In appeal before us, the ld. AR of the assessee contended that now this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd vs. CIT 350 ITR 527. It was further submitted that no disallowance has been made by the AO himself for Assessment Year 2011-12 where the claim of the assessee was made in the return of income. Therefore, in subsequent years revenue has accepted the claim of the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that disallowance may please be deleted. 9. The ld.DR supported the orde…

Budhrani Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, for statistical purposes, all the appeals filed by the assessee will be considered to be allowed in the manner aforesaid

ITA 4263/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri Agnes P. Thomas
Section 143(3)Section 147

…als were adjourned from time to time. He submitted that Special Bench in the case of Indus Ind Bank vs. ACIT, 135 ITD has rendered the decision, which was against the assessee. He submitted that subsequently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Vs. CIT, 350 ITR 527 (SC) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. He also submitted that assessee has submitted various applications for admission of additional evidence and they are also to be considered while deciding the present appeals. 3. At the outset, it was submitted by him that the entire issue raised in the present appeals will have to be reconside…

M/S Bharti Hexacom Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and department’s appeal dismissed

ITA 3394/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra: & Shri A.T. Varkey:

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla CA &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 194HSection 194JSection 234BSection 35ASection 40Section 54

…79. With reference to all above clauses of SI ITO out sourcing agreement, ld. counsel submitted that assessee was paying only service charges and no payments were made with respect to assets. 80. Ld. counsel relied on following decisions: - ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527; - CIT Vs. Shaan Finance (I) Ltd. 231 ITR 308 (SC) - CIT Vs. Reetu Finlease P. Ltd. 286 ITR 652 (Del.). 81. Ld. counsel submitted that in the case of ICDS Ltd. (supra), the company in course of its business had given on lease plant & machinery to its customers for the use by the customer for its business. It was held that such company was for th…

Abn Amro Bank N.V., Kolkata vs. DDIT, International Taxation - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1738/KOL/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Bajroria, Sr. Adocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjana, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 44C

…spute that the Learned AO himself had not made any disallowance on this issue from Asst Year 2010-11 onwards. 9.2.2. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd vs CIT reported in (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein it was held that :- “Held, affirming the decision of the Tribunal, (i) that the assessee was a leasing company which leased out the trucks that it purchased. Therefore, on a combined reading of section 2(13) and (24) of the Act the income derived from leasing of the trucks would be business income, or income derived in the course of…

Kedia Shares & Stock Brokers Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6128/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Kedia Shares & Stock Acit, Brokers Limited, Circle-4(3), बनाम/ 418, Commerce House, Room No.649, 6Th Floor, Vs. 140, Nagindas Master Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400023 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aaack2528E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 32oSection 42

…686 (Mad.), CIT vs Thanthai PT Corporation 248 ITR 632 (Mad.), CIT vs WEP Perferals Ltd. (2014) 362 ITR 508 (Karn.) and CIT vs Jawhar Kala Kendra (2014) 362 ITR 515 (Raj.) supports the case of the assessee. 2.5. The ratio laid down in ICDS Ltd. Vs CIT (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC), Prkash Leasing Ltd. Vs DCIT (2013) 356 ITR 179 (Karn.), CIT vs Biad Leasing and Finance Company Ltd. (2013) 359 ITR 413 (Raj.), CIT vs H.B. Leasing and Finance Ltd. (2014) 360 ITR 362 (Del.), CIT vs Glenmark Pharmaceutical Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 359 (Bom.), CIT vs Ansal Properties and Industries Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 637 (Del.), supports the cas…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…her submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal for AY 1996-97 and 1997-98 has been reported in 40 CCH 175. The Ld A.R also submitted that an identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS vs. CIT (350 ITR 527). 9. In view of the above, by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case, we set aside the order of learned CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of depreciation on leased assets. The ld D.R submitted that the Learned CIT(A), whi…