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 367,154 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

Ifci Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number, 1200/del/2011 filed by the assessee for assessment year 1999 – 2000 is allowed

ITA 1201/DEL/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…s of this Agreement‖ Right to repossess ―On termination of this Lease, pursuant Article IX – 9.2 to clause 9.1 above: - The Lessor shall, without any notice be entitled to remove and repossess the equipment…‖ 16. Honourable Supreme Court ICDS Ltd versus CIT (350 ITR 527) has also held that definitions of ―ownership‖ essentially make ownership a function of legal right or title against the rest of the world. However, it is ―nomen generalissimum‖, and its meaning is to be gathered from the connection in which it is used, and from the subject matter to which it is applied. As long as the assessee has a right to ret…

Ifci Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number, 1200/del/2011 filed by the assessee for assessment year 1999 – 2000 is allowed

ITA 1200/DEL/2011[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1999-2000

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…s of this Agreement‖ Right to repossess ―On termination of this Lease, pursuant Article IX – 9.2 to clause 9.1 above: - The Lessor shall, without any notice be entitled to remove and repossess the equipment…‖ 16. Honourable Supreme Court ICDS Ltd versus CIT (350 ITR 527) has also held that definitions of ―ownership‖ essentially make ownership a function of legal right or title against the rest of the world. However, it is ―nomen generalissimum‖, and its meaning is to be gathered from the connection in which it is used, and from the subject matter to which it is applied. As long as the assessee has a right to ret…

M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 725/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate along with Ajay Roti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V Arvind, Advocate
Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

…and the Hon'ble DRP have erred in law and on facts in disallowing the depreciation on leased assets (net of lease rental and interest) amounting to INR 24,60,33,070 by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in ICDS Ltd v. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 (SC) and other judicial precedents. 8. Disallowance under section 14A of the Act 8.1. The learned ACIT and the Hon'ble DRP have erred in law and on facts in disallowing expenditure amounting to INR 78,54,075 without appreciating that the Appellant has not earned any exempt income during the year. 8.2. The learned ACIT has erred in law and on f…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 140/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…transferred to the lessee then the arrangement can not be said to be of a loan or finance. The judgements referred to are as under: 1. CIT vs Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. 231 ITR 308 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Maharashtra Apex Corporation 254 ITR 98(SC) 3. ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527(SC) 4. Rajshree Roadways vs. Union of India [2003] 129taxman 663(Raj.) 5. PKF Finance Ltd. Vs CIT (Pb. & Hry) 6. CIT Vs Cosmo Films Ltd. (2011) 338ITR 226 7. CIT vs Punjab State Electricity Board (2010) 320 ITR 469 (PB & Hry.) 8. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT ITA 4599/Mum./2002 (Mumbai Tribunal). 9. Minda Corporation limited vs DCIT ITA…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 139/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…transferred to the lessee then the arrangement can not be said to be of a loan or finance. The judgements referred to are as under: 1. CIT vs Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. 231 ITR 308 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Maharashtra Apex Corporation 254 ITR 98(SC) 3. ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527(SC) 4. Rajshree Roadways vs. Union of India [2003] 129taxman 663(Raj.) 5. PKF Finance Ltd. Vs CIT (Pb. & Hry) 6. CIT Vs Cosmo Films Ltd. (2011) 338ITR 226 7. CIT vs Punjab State Electricity Board (2010) 320 ITR 469 (PB & Hry.) 8. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT ITA 4599/Mum./2002 (Mumbai Tribunal). 9. Minda Corporation limited vs DCIT ITA…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 547/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…transferred to the lessee then the arrangement can not be said to be of a loan or finance. The judgements referred to are as under: 1. CIT vs Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. 231 ITR 308 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Maharashtra Apex Corporation 254 ITR 98(SC) 3. ICDS Ltd. Vs. CIT 350 ITR 527(SC) 4. Rajshree Roadways vs. Union of India [2003] 129taxman 663(Raj.) 5. PKF Finance Ltd. Vs CIT (Pb. & Hry) 6. CIT Vs Cosmo Films Ltd. (2011) 338ITR 226 7. CIT vs Punjab State Electricity Board (2010) 320 ITR 469 (PB & Hry.) 8. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT ITA 4599/Mum./2002 (Mumbai Tribunal). 9. Minda Corporation limited vs DCIT ITA…

M/S. Industrial Develop, Ment Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

ITA 3371/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2020AY 1998-1999

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3371/Mum/2004 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3372/Mum/2004 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3373/Mum/2004 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2000-01) Industrial Development Bank Of The Dy. Commissioner Of Income India, Taxation Cell, 3 Rd Floor, Tax, Range 3(1), 6 Th Floor, Room Vs. Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, No. 623, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005 Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaaci1105R Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4744/Mum/2005 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2001-02) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 5962/Mum/2008 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2002-03) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3907/Mum/2009 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3908/Mum/2009 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2004-05) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3909/Mum/2009 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2005-06) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2488/Mum/2010 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2006-07) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 13/Mum/2011

Section 143(3)

…1994-95 to 1996-97 by way of a combined order dated 29.10.2014 (supra). We have perused the said decision and find that the Tribunal referred to various decisions, inter-alia, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd.Vs CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527 (SC), wherein Hon‘ble Court held that even in cases of ‗financial leases‘, the depreciation allowance contemplated under Section 32(1) of the Act is allowable to the lessor. It has not been shown by the Ld. CIT-DR that any of such precedents in assessee‘s own case has been altered by any higher authority. Therefore, so far as this aspect of the m…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Samarth Lifeters Pvt .Ltd, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

ITA 6233/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.Dcit, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/S. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6Th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial To Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E).

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR
Section 2(28)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON. JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/s. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial to Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E). PAN No. AACCS 6646 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CA. Department By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR Date of hearing : 04/12/2019. Date of pronouncement : 04/12/2019. O R D E R PER RAJES…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Samarth Lifeters Pvt .Ltd, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

ITA 5738/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.Dcit, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/S. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6Th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial To Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E).

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR
Section 2(28)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON. JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Circle-3, Thane, Vs. M/s. Samarth Lifters Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 2, 6th Floor, B-Wing, Nayan Building, Next B-Wing, Wagle Industrial to Sri Maa Balniketan School, Estate, Road No.16Z, Eastern Express Highway, Thane (W) Kopri, Than (E). PAN No. AACCS 6646 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CA. Department By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar – Sr. DR Date of hearing : 02/12/2019. Date of pronouncement : 03/12/2019. O R D E R PER RAJES…

Rak Ceramics India Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2226/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sri Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37

…ed DR supported the orders of the authorities below. Page 2 of 6 ITA No 2226 of 2017 Rak Ceramics India P Ltd Secunderabad. 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd vs. CIT (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 129 (S.C) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering the allowability of depreciation of leased vehicles in the hands of the assessee therein who was engaged in the business of hire purchase of vehicles and leasing of such vehicles and real estate etc. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the assessee therein was recorded as the exclusiv…

M/S Cifco Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (OSD II), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3992/MUM/2001[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2019AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S Cifco Finance Ltd. Dcit (Osd Ii), Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor, Central Section, C.G. O. Unit-I, Dalal Street, Fort, Vs. Building Annexc, 101, Mumbai-400001. M.K. Marg, Pan: Aaacc1765F Mumbai-400020. Appellant Respondent Dcit (Osd Ii), M/S Cifco Finance Ltd. Central Section, C.G. O. Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor, Building Annexc, Vs. Unit-I, Dalal Street, Fort, 101, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaacc1765F Appellant Respondent M/S Cifco Finance Ltd. Dcit (Osd Ii), Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor, Central Section, C.G. O. Unit-I, Dalal Street, Fort, Vs. Building Annexc, Mumbai-400001. 101, M.K. Marg, Pan: Aaacc1765F Mumbai-400020. Appellant Respondent Dcit (Osd Ii), M/S Cifco Finance Ltd. Central Section, C.G. O. Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor, Building Annexc, Vs. Unit-I, Dalal Street, Fort, 101, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaacc1765F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vipul Joshi With Shri Mukul Pandya (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Ashish Pophare (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi with Shri Mukul Pandya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Ashish Pophare (DR)
Section 254(1)

…and summoned General Manager of Kores India. All documents and statements and enquiry confirmed the installation and date of delivery. M/s Cifco Finance Ltd. 19. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of ICDS Ltd. vs. CIT [350 ITR 527(SC)] held that when the assessee purchased vehicles from manufacturers, leased out those vehicles to customers, it was entitled to claim depreciation in respect of vehicles so leased out. Thus, on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court the assessee is entitled for claim of depreciation on leased asset. 20. On the other hand, the ld. DR…

M/S Niit Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.2801/Del

ITA 2801/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Tejasvi Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Sankar Naskar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)

…t of finance lease for the purpose of accounts is not relevant for the purpose of computation of income for tax purpose under the Act. The assessee also relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein the Court held that “lesser is the owner of the leased property in the case of finance lease and is, therefore, entitled to depreciation on the same.” The assessee also relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Banswara Synthetic Ltd., 216 Taxman 113 (Raj.) in which it was…

M/S. Niit Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.2801/Del

ITA 376/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Tejasvi Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Sankar Naskar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)

…t of finance lease for the purpose of accounts is not relevant for the purpose of computation of income for tax purpose under the Act. The assessee also relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein the Court held that “lesser is the owner of the leased property in the case of finance lease and is, therefore, entitled to depreciation on the same.” The assessee also relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Banswara Synthetic Ltd., 216 Taxman 113 (Raj.) in which it was…

Gujarat State Financial Corporation, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 523/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhay : 2002-03 Ay : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…d Circular provided that the ownership of the assets was to be determined by the terms of the contract between the lessor and lessee. 3.3 The Ld. AR placed reliance on judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. vs. CIT Mysore (2013) reported in 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that section 32 of the Act required use of asset for the purpose of business and it did not mandate usage of asset by the assessee itself. It was submitted that in this case the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that even though motor vehicles were ITA 522, 523/AHD/2015 Assessment year 2002-03, 03-04 regi…

Gujarat State Financial Corporation, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 522/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhay : 2002-03 Ay : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…d Circular provided that the ownership of the assets was to be determined by the terms of the contract between the lessor and lessee. 3.3 The Ld. AR placed reliance on judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ICDS Ltd. vs. CIT Mysore (2013) reported in 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that section 32 of the Act required use of asset for the purpose of business and it did not mandate usage of asset by the assessee itself. It was submitted that in this case the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that even though motor vehicles were ITA 522, 523/AHD/2015 Assessment year 2002-03, 03-04 regi…

Dholu Construction & Projects Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3144/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

…power for its direct mining operations for the contract, if it was so awarded, we wonder whether that would make any difference particularly in view of CBDT Circulars No. 609 and 652 and the decision of the Supreme Court in case of I.C.D.S. Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 527/212 Taxman 550/29 taxmann.com 129. However, when this issue does not arise for direct consideration, we need not conclude the same. 12. All in all, we see no error in the view taken by the Tribunal. No question of law arises. Tax Appeals are dismissed. 20. Respectfully following the aforesaid Jurisdictional High Court order, we allow the claim o…

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

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 255/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

…( 154 Taxman 512). The Appellant submits that the said case does not lay down the law relating to the allowability of depreciation under the Income Tax Act,1961 in the case of finance leases. This issue has now achieved finality in the case of ICDS Ltd vs CIT 350 ITR 527 (SC) which has been followed by the jurisdictional High Court in Manipal Finance Corporation limited vs CIT [2014] 49 Taxmann.com 353 ( Karnataka). In the case of Sale and Lease back with related parties the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, City-1 vs Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd [2018] 256 Taxman 39…

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

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 254/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

…( 154 Taxman 512). The Appellant submits that the said case does not lay down the law relating to the allowability of depreciation under the Income Tax Act,1961 in the case of finance leases. This issue has now achieved finality in the case of ICDS Ltd vs CIT 350 ITR 527 (SC) which has been followed by the jurisdictional High Court in Manipal Finance Corporation limited vs CIT [2014] 49 Taxmann.com 353 ( Karnataka). In the case of Sale and Lease back with related parties the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, City-1 vs Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd [2018] 256 Taxman 39…

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

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 253/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

…( 154 Taxman 512). The Appellant submits that the said case does not lay down the law relating to the allowability of depreciation under the Income Tax Act,1961 in the case of finance leases. This issue has now achieved finality in the case of ICDS Ltd vs CIT 350 ITR 527 (SC) which has been followed by the jurisdictional High Court in Manipal Finance Corporation limited vs CIT [2014] 49 Taxmann.com 353 ( Karnataka). In the case of Sale and Lease back with related parties the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, City-1 vs Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd [2018] 256 Taxman 39…

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

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 252/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

…( 154 Taxman 512). The Appellant submits that the said case does not lay down the law relating to the allowability of depreciation under the Income Tax Act,1961 in the case of finance leases. This issue has now achieved finality in the case of ICDS Ltd vs CIT 350 ITR 527 (SC) which has been followed by the jurisdictional High Court in Manipal Finance Corporation limited vs CIT [2014] 49 Taxmann.com 353 ( Karnataka). In the case of Sale and Lease back with related parties the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, City-1 vs Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd [2018] 256 Taxman 39…