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)

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 246/BANG/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 244/BANG/2018[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 242/BANG/2018[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/BANG/2018[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 240/BANG/2018[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 239/BANG/2018[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2022AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, CA

Section 244ASection 260ASection 43

…e second round of appeal took note of the fact that the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of ICDS Ltd. reported in (2007) 161 taxmann.com 293 has been reversed by Page 6 ITA Nos. 239 to 242, 244 & 246/Bang/2018 Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 350 ITR 527. Having regard to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Ld.AO for fresh consideration after examining the leased transaction in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. This decision of the Tribunal dated 20/09/2019 was challenged by assessee before Hon’ble High Court. 8. We have cons…

M/S Poonawalla Fincoup Limited, Kolkata vs. PCIT-1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 218/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 218/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Poonawalla Fincorp Limited Pcit-1, Kolkata Development House Vs 4Th Floor 24, Park Street Kolkata - 700016 Pan : Aabcm9445K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Revenue By : Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, Cit (D/R) सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Pr. Cit – Kolkata-1 Vide Order Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1042104843(1), Dt. 30/03/2022, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Hereinafter Referred To As The Act.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. PujaFor Respondent: Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, CIT (D/R)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 218/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Poonawalla Fincorp Limited PCIT-1, Kolkata Development House Vs 4th Floor 24, Park Street Kolkata - 700016 PAN : AABCM9445K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, CA Revenue by : Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, CIT (D/R) सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30/08/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER SHRI GIR…

Ttk Protective Devices Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1966/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…n finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered ITA Nos.1965 & 1966/Chny/2017 opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

Ttk Protective Devices Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1965/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…n finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered ITA Nos.1965 & 1966/Chny/2017 opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

ACIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Ltd ( Datar Switch Gear Ltd Merged ), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3806/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Section 143(3)

…d to claim depreciation of Rs.43.42 crores during the current year, since the 14,206 units were ready for giving on lease to MSEB. In this regard, the Ld CIT(A) placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS vs. CIT (350 ITR 527). The Learned CIT(A) also noticed that, as per the Explanation 5 inserted in Sec. 32(1) with effect from AY 2002-03, the depreciation is to be allowed from AY 2002-03 onwards compulsorily. In that case, the unabsorbed depreciation has to be carried forward to AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 u/s 32(2). Hence, in any case, the assessee is entitled to deprec…

M/S. Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 773/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A Nos.773 & 2041/Bang/2016 Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, C.A (A.R)For Respondent: Shri Dilip, Advocate, Standing

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…ase rental has to be assessed as income. The objection is disposed accordingly.” 9.1 We notice that this issue has been restored back to the file of AO with the direction to follow the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd (2013)(29 Taxmann.com 129)(SC) . Following the same, we restore this issue to the file of AO with similar directions. 10.0 Ground No.8 relates to the disallowance of foreign exchange loss of Rs.11.84 crores. The assessee has debited above said amount to the Profit and loss account and claimed the same as deduction. The assessee had revalued all its monetary foreig…

M/S.Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2041/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A Nos.773 & 2041/Bang/2016 Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, C.A (A.R)For Respondent: Shri Dilip, Advocate, Standing

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…ase rental has to be assessed as income. The objection is disposed accordingly.” 9.1 We notice that this issue has been restored back to the file of AO with the direction to follow the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd (2013)(29 Taxmann.com 129)(SC) . Following the same, we restore this issue to the file of AO with similar directions. 10.0 Ground No.8 relates to the disallowance of foreign exchange loss of Rs.11.84 crores. The assessee has debited above said amount to the Profit and loss account and claimed the same as deduction. The assessee had revalued all its monetary foreig…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India (P) Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1228/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A Nos.773 & 2041/Bang/2016 Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, C.A (A.R)For Respondent: Shri Dilip, Advocate, Standing

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…ase rental has to be assessed as income. The objection is disposed accordingly.” 9.1 We notice that this issue has been restored back to the file of AO with the direction to follow the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd (2013)(29 Taxmann.com 129)(SC) . Following the same, we restore this issue to the file of AO with similar directions. 10.0 Ground No.8 relates to the disallowance of foreign exchange loss of Rs.11.84 crores. The assessee has debited above said amount to the Profit and loss account and claimed the same as deduction. The assessee had revalued all its monetary foreig…

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2517/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…Act do not differentiate between finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2516/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…Act do not differentiate between finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2515/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…Act do not differentiate between finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 852/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar S. K, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…aimed by the Appellant in the computation of income. 6.3. The learned CIT(A) and the AO have erred in law and on facts in disregarding the reliance placed by the Appellant on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of M/s ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). 6.4. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) and the AO have erred in law and on facts in failing to allow depreciation in respect of such assets even though it has been held that lease rentals are capital expenditure in nature. 6.5. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts in proposing to disallow the lease rentals under section 40(a)(i…

Joint Commisioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Texas Instruments India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 831/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar S. K, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…aimed by the Appellant in the computation of income. 6.3. The learned CIT(A) and the AO have erred in law and on facts in disregarding the reliance placed by the Appellant on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of M/s ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). 6.4. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) and the AO have erred in law and on facts in failing to allow depreciation in respect of such assets even though it has been held that lease rentals are capital expenditure in nature. 6.5. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts in proposing to disallow the lease rentals under section 40(a)(i…

M/S. Tristar Container Services (Asia) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 292/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.937/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.938/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.939/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.940/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.941/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.942/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.292/Chny/2019 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Tristar Container Services Acit बनाम/ (Asia) Private Limited Company Circle Iii (1), No. 18, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chennai – 600 034. Vs. Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-4043-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Palani Kumar (Cit)–Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 06-05-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 15-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar (CIT)–Ld. DR

…Act do not differentiate between finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

Tristar Container Services (Asia) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 942/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.937/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.938/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.939/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.940/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.941/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.942/Chny/2016 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.292/Chny/2019 (िनधाEरणवषE / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Tristar Container Services Acit बनाम/ (Asia) Private Limited Company Circle Iii (1), No. 18, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chennai – 600 034. Vs. Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-4043-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Palani Kumar (Cit)–Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 06-05-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 15-06-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar (CIT)–Ld. DR

…Act do not differentiate between finance lease as well as operating lease. We are of the considered opinion that whatever is the nature of lease, only the lessor is entitled for depreciation as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ICDS Limited Vs CIT (350 ITR 527). The decision of Delhi Tribunal in Minda Corporation Ltd. V/s DCIT (69 Taxmann.com 317) has also support the same view. The case of the revenue is that in case of finance lease, substantial risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the lessee and therefore, the lessee would be entitled to claim depreciation and not the principal componen…

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT

What is ICDS Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing ICDS Ltd. v. CIT

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Maharashtra Apex Corporation Limited, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Udupi

M/S Poonawalla Fincoup Limited, Kolkata vs. PCIT-1, Kolkata

Ttk Protective Devices Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

Ttk Protective Devices Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

ACIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Ltd ( Datar Switch Gear Ltd Merged ), Mumbai

M/S. Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

M/S.Ibm India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India (P) Limited, Bangalore

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

M/S Sundaram Infotech Solutions Limited (Merged With Sundaram Finance Limited), Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai

Texas Instruments (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

Joint Commisioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Texas Instruments India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

M/S. Tristar Container Services (Asia) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

Tristar Container Services (Asia) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai