Relies on CIT v. O P Monga

162 ITR 224High Court1986#16884 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 24asection 35esection 269uasection 75section 52interest under section 201(1a)section 32(1)(ii)commercial rightssection 192section 32(1)section 269enduring benefit

Judgments citing Relies on CIT v. O P Monga

M/S Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2139/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

…nstant land is not owned by the assessee and hence crucial test of ownership u/s 32 has not bene met  Long term lease does not in itself entitle depreciation on land which is in the ownership/possession of State Government  Relies on CIT vs O P Monga (1986) 162 ITR 224 (Bom); ACIT vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. [(2010) 4 ITR(T) 513 (Cochin)]; and Drilbits International Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Nasik [TS 822 ITAT 2011 (Pune)] which are also distinguishable to the facts of assessee’s case since they are lease of land simpliciter where as in present case it is mining lease. 6.13 Hence, Ld. A.R. submitted that claim of th…

M/S Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2138/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

…nstant land is not owned by the assessee and hence crucial test of ownership u/s 32 has not bene met  Long term lease does not in itself entitle depreciation on land which is in the ownership/possession of State Government  Relies on CIT vs O P Monga (1986) 162 ITR 224 (Bom); ACIT vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. [(2010) 4 ITR(T) 513 (Cochin)]; and Drilbits International Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Nasik [TS 822 ITAT 2011 (Pune)] which are also distinguishable to the facts of assessee’s case since they are lease of land simpliciter where as in present case it is mining lease. 6.13 Hence, Ld. A.R. submitted that claim of th…

M/S Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2137/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

…nstant land is not owned by the assessee and hence crucial test of ownership u/s 32 has not bene met  Long term lease does not in itself entitle depreciation on land which is in the ownership/possession of State Government  Relies on CIT vs O P Monga (1986) 162 ITR 224 (Bom); ACIT vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. [(2010) 4 ITR(T) 513 (Cochin)]; and Drilbits International Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Nasik [TS 822 ITAT 2011 (Pune)] which are also distinguishable to the facts of assessee’s case since they are lease of land simpliciter where as in present case it is mining lease. 6.13 Hence, Ld. A.R. submitted that claim of th…

M/S Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2136/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

…nstant land is not owned by the assessee and hence crucial test of ownership u/s 32 has not bene met  Long term lease does not in itself entitle depreciation on land which is in the ownership/possession of State Government  Relies on CIT vs O P Monga (1986) 162 ITR 224 (Bom); ACIT vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. [(2010) 4 ITR(T) 513 (Cochin)]; and Drilbits International Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Nasik [TS 822 ITAT 2011 (Pune)] which are also distinguishable to the facts of assessee’s case since they are lease of land simpliciter where as in present case it is mining lease. 6.13 Hence, Ld. A.R. submitted that claim of th…

M/S Karnataka Emta Coal Mines Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2135/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

…nstant land is not owned by the assessee and hence crucial test of ownership u/s 32 has not bene met  Long term lease does not in itself entitle depreciation on land which is in the ownership/possession of State Government  Relies on CIT vs O P Monga (1986) 162 ITR 224 (Bom); ACIT vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. [(2010) 4 ITR(T) 513 (Cochin)]; and Drilbits International Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT Nasik [TS 822 ITAT 2011 (Pune)] which are also distinguishable to the facts of assessee’s case since they are lease of land simpliciter where as in present case it is mining lease. 6.13 Hence, Ld. A.R. submitted that claim of th…

Relies on CIT v. O P Monga (162 ITR 224) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax