NTPC Ltd. v. DCIT (54 SOT 177)

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 3164/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 37Section 43(1)

…61. The Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electricity is 'goods' and therefore production/generation of electricity is production of article or thing. Further, Delhi Tribunal in case of NTPC Ltd. Vs.DCIT (2012) 54 SOT 177 wherein I.T.A Nos. 3164 & 3124/Ahd/2015. A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 12 DCIT Vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. assessee's claim of additional depreciation was disallowed on the ground that power/ electricity generated by assessee could not be equated with an article or thing which was being manufacturing in an industrial undertaking, held…

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 3124/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 37Section 43(1)

…61. The Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electricity is 'goods' and therefore production/generation of electricity is production of article or thing. Further, Delhi Tribunal in case of NTPC Ltd. Vs.DCIT (2012) 54 SOT 177 wherein I.T.A Nos. 3164 & 3124/Ahd/2015. A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 12 DCIT Vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. assessee's claim of additional depreciation was disallowed on the ground that power/ electricity generated by assessee could not be equated with an article or thing which was being manufacturing in an industrial undertaking, held…

TRIMURTI GRIHANIRMAN PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOL-2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ar.)-para.3. (iv) Adani Wilmar Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 459 (Ahd. - Trib.)- Para.10. (v) DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 49 taxmann.com 487/151 ITD 563 (Delhi - Trib.)- Para.13. (vi) N.T.P.C. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 22 taxmann.com 247/54 SOT 177 (Delhi) (URO) -Para.12. (vii) Eldeco Infrastructure & Properties Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 23 taxmann.com 17/52 SOT 207 (Delhi) (URO) - Para.7. Page 12 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 525/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Trimurti Grihanirman Pvt. Ltd. (viii) Hulas Rahul Gupta v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 191/53 SOT 301 (Delhi) (URO)-Para.14. (ix) Rain Commodities Lt…

AIR CONTRAL INDIA PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1538/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri B. B. ManeFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…icer was not relevant to current scenario as dealt with the provisions of Section 80HHC of the Act and not with the provisions of Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of N.T.P.C. vs. DCIT [2012] 54 SOT 177 (URO) (Delhi) (Trib.), considered this decision while dealing with the activity of generation of electricity with respect of additional depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) and ruled in favour of assessee. Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. VTM Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 336 (Mad.) (HC) examined the same issue and dismissed the revenue appeal seeking to…

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 783/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT) &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…1961. Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electricity is ‘goods’ and therefore production/generation of electricity is production of article or thing. Further, Delhi Tribunal in case of NTPC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 54 SOT 177 wherein assessee’s claim of additional depreciation was disallowed on the ground that power/electricity generated by assessee could not be equated with an article or thing which was being manufactured in an industrial undertaking, held that if there can be sale and purchase of electric energy like any moveable object, then electric energy is cover…

KADODARA POWER PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 143/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.143/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2006-07 M/S. Kadodara Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 30-33& 60-63, Block Income Tax, Circle-1, Surat No.179/2, Kadodara Char Rasta, Palsana, Surat 394327 Pan: Aacck5249E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 32Section 32(1)(i)Section 32(1)(ii)

…1. The Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electricity is ‘goods’ and therefore production/generation of electricity is production of article or thing. Further, Delhi Tribunal in case of NTPC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 54 SOT 177 wherein assessee’s claim of additional depreciation was disallowed on the ground that power/electricity generated by assessee could not be equated with an article or thing which was being manufactured in an industrial undertaking, held that if there can be sale and purchase of electric energy like any moveable object, then electric energy is cover…

ACIT CIR 27(1), NAVI MUMBAI vs. DEEPALI ATUL GANATRA, MUMBAI

ITA 7251/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar -ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-Sr.AR-CIT

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

…icer was not relevant to current scenario as dealt with the provisions of Section 80HHC of the Act and not with the provisions of Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that ITAT, Delhi Bench in case of N.T.P.C. vs. DCIT [2012] 54 SOT 177 (URO) (Delhi) (Trib.), considered this decision while dealing with the activity of generation of electricity with respect of additional depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) and ruled in favour of assessee. Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. VTM Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 336 (Mad.) (HC) examined the same issue and dismissed the revenue appeal seeking to…

M/S. SANWARIA AGROILS LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 620/IND/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 32

…1. The Supreme Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. NTPC Ltd. 5 SSC 203 held that electricity is ‘goods’ and therefore production/generation of electricity is production of article or thing. Further, Delhi Tribunal in case of NTPC Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 54 SOT 177 wherein assessee’s claim of additional depreciation was disallowed on the ground that power/electricity generated by assessee could not be equated with an article or thing which was being manufactured in an industrial undertaking, held that if there can be sale and purchase of electric energy like any moveable object, then electric energy is cover…

ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI vs. CITY LIFE DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed whereas the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6208/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. City Life Developers, Acit-25(1), 5Th C-11, 2Nd Floor, Floor, Agarwal Golden Chamber, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Plot No.13/A, Fun Republic Bkc, Bandra – East, Vs. Road, Mumbai - 51 Off New Link Road, Andheri-West, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aadfc1252B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 O/O. Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. City Life Developers, 5Th Floor, Agarwal Golden Income Tax 25(1), Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Chamber, Room No.202, 2Nd Floor, Plot No.13/A, Fun Republic Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Bandra (East) Off New Link Road, Mumbai – 400 051 Andheri-West, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aadfc1252B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram, Aditya Ajgaonkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, D.R

Section 263

…issue regarding the allowability of additional depreciation on wind mill. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of “NTPC Ltd. vs. DCIT” 2012 54 SOT 177 wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that the process of generation of electricity is akin to manufacture or production of article or thing and that an assessee engaged in the activity of generation of electricity would be entitled to additional depreciation under section 32(1). 9. The Ld. D.R. could not point out any differentiating cas…

CITY LIFE DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. CIT 25, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed whereas the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6116/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. City Life Developers, Acit-25(1), 5Th C-11, 2Nd Floor, Floor, Agarwal Golden Chamber, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Plot No.13/A, Fun Republic Bkc, Bandra – East, Vs. Road, Mumbai - 51 Off New Link Road, Andheri-West, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aadfc1252B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 O/O. Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. City Life Developers, 5Th Floor, Agarwal Golden Income Tax 25(1), Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Chamber, Room No.202, 2Nd Floor, Plot No.13/A, Fun Republic Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Bandra (East) Off New Link Road, Mumbai – 400 051 Andheri-West, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aadfc1252B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram, Aditya Ajgaonkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, D.R

Section 263

…issue regarding the allowability of additional depreciation on wind mill. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of “NTPC Ltd. vs. DCIT” 2012 54 SOT 177 wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that the process of generation of electricity is akin to manufacture or production of article or thing and that an assessee engaged in the activity of generation of electricity would be entitled to additional depreciation under section 32(1). 9. The Ld. D.R. could not point out any differentiating cas…

ACIT, KOTA vs. MANGALAM CEMENT LTD., KOTA

ITA 82/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gurjar (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(i)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 82/JP/14 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 cuke The ACIT, Circle-1, Kota M/s Mangalam Cement Ltd. Vs. Aditya Nagar, Morak Ramganj Mandi, Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABCM 6602Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 681/JP/14 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke M/s Mangalam Cement Ltd. The ACIT, Circle-1, Kot…

ATUL SHIVDAS GANATRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 22(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4899/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

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

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…he claim of additional depreciation of Rs. 2,19,29,891/- on two windmills acquired and installed by the Appellant during the year. 5. The learned CIT (A) erred in not following the decision of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of N.T.P.C. Limited v. DCIT [2012] 54 SOT 177 (Del.) which held that process of generation of electricity is akin to manufacture or production of an article or thing and that an assessee engaged in the activity of generation of electricity would be entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia).” 2. Assessee is engaged in trading in cotton bales and generation of power. He claimed deduct…

NTPC Ltd. v. DCIT

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing NTPC Ltd. v. DCIT