SMS Demag (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

132 TTJ 498Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#16652 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing SMS Demag (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

Altran Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2904/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 2904/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Altran Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., C/O Ernst & Young Llp, The Deputy Ground & 1St Floor, Commissioner Of Income ‘A’ Wing, Divyasree Chambers, Tax, Vs. #11, O’ Shaughnessy Road, Circle – 1 (1)(1), Langford Gardens, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 025. Pan: Aaaca7125R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nageswar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 31/10/2017 Passed By The Ld.Dcit, Circle – 1(1)(1), Bangalore For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Altran Technologies India Private Limited (The 'Appellant') Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The 'Id. Ao') Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The 'Act') Pursuant To The Directions Issued By The Hon'Ble Dispute Resolution Panel (`Drp') On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…terated the stand of the Revenue as contained in ground No.5. In our view, the issue raised by the Revenue in the ground of appeal is no longer res integra and has been considered and decided by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of SMS Demag Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, 132 TTJ 498 and Sonic Biochem Extractions Pvt. Ltd., (2013) 23 ITR (Trib) 447 ITAT Mum. In Sonic Biochem Extractions Pvt. Ltd. (supra), identical issue was considered and decided by the Mumbai Tribunal. Following were the relevant observations:- “The assessee purchased software, capitalised the payment to the computers account as the software came along with…

Subex Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, Ground No.5 of the assessee's appeal is allowed and appeal of revenue does not require adjudication

ITA 544/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit (T.P) A No.544/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S.Subex Limited, Rmz Ecoworld, Orr, Devarabisanahalli, Bangalore-560 037 ….Appellant Pan Aabcs 9255R Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(2), Bangalore. ……Respondent. It (T.P) A No.634/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) (By Revenue) Assessee By: Shri Soumitra Kumar Chakraborthy, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 08.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2019

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Kumar Chakraborthy, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)

Section 143(3)Section 40

…tion does not arise in view of the following decisions rendered by the Tribunal. i. IT( (International Taxation) Vs. Kawasaki Micro Electronics Inc. (C.O. No.18/Bang/2015 in IT(IT)A No.1221/Bang/2014 (Bangalore Tribunal) ii. SMS Demag (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 132 TTJ 498 (Delhi Tribunal) iii. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries Limited (ITA No.57 of 2009 – unreported P & H High Court) and iv. SKOL Breweries Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2013) 29 taxmann.com 111 (Mumbai Tribunal) Accordingly, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the disallowance made by the DRP should be directed to be deleted. 7. We heard the ld. DR…

Asst CIT Cir 4, Thane vs. Sri Swastik Homeland Agencies P.Ltd, Thane

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7487/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 32Section 40

…to the tune of ` 45 lakhs u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the above said contract amount of ` 4.50 crores. The learned CIT(A), however, deleted the addition by following the decision rendered by Delhi Bench of the ITAT in the case of SMS Demag (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (132 TTJ 498). The Revenue is aggrieved by the said decision of the learned CIT(A). 5. We noticed that Delhi Bench of the ITAT, in the above said case, has expressed the view that the depreciation cannot be disallowed on the ground that the assessee did not deduct tax at source at the time of incurring the capital expenditure and the provisions of section 40…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Novell Software Development India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and the

ITA 281/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanshri S Jayaramanit(Tp)A No.281 /Bang/2015 (Asst. Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. M/S Novell Software Development India Pvt. Ltd., ‘Laurel, ‘Block-D, 65/2, Bagmane Tech Park, C.V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore-560 093. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R Reddy, CIT

Section 14ASection 40

…decisions: (i) Crane Software International Ltd. v. ACIT (judgment dated 08.02.2011 in ITA No.741/Bang/2010). IT(TP)A No.281/B/15 CO No.101/B/15 23 (ii) SKOL Breweries Ltd. v. ACIT (2013) 29 taxmann.com 111/ITAT Mum) (iii) SMS Demag P.Ltd v. DCIT (2010) 132 TTJ 498 (ITAT Del) (iv) Kawasaki Microelectronics Inc. v. DDIT (2015) 60 taxmann.com 256 (Bangalore – Trb.) 30. We are of the opinion that the issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of Kawasaki Microelectronics Inc. Vs DICT (International Taxation) in IT(TP) No.1512/Bang/2010 dated 26,6,2015, where it has been held that once the assesse…

Subex Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 373/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhury

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II(DR)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 35D

…lied on the following case law: a. ITO (International Taxation), Ward 1(2), Bangalore V. M/s. Kawasaki Micro Electronics Inc. [Cross objection No. 18/Bang/2015 in I.T. (IT) A. No. 1221/Bang/2014 (Bangalore Tribunal)]; b. SMS Demag (P) Ltd. V. DCIT [(2010) 132 TTJ 498 (Delhi Tribunal)]; c. CIT V. Mark Auto Industries Limited [ITA No. 57 of 2009 – unreported (Punjab and Haryana High Court]; and IT(TP)A Nos.373 & 374/Bang/2015 Page 16 of 27 d. SKOL Breweries Ltd. V. ACIT [(2013) 29 taxmann.com 111 (Mumbai Tribunal)], etc. 13.1. Another contention raised is that the AO wrongly calculated the depreciation @…