Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

145 ITD 17Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#2768 most cited

What is Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A UPS is an integral part of a computer and is eligible for depreciation at 60%.

42

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT · 145 ITD 17 · ITAT Chennai · UPS · computer · depreciation · 60%

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 44

Issues it is cited on

section 33acdepreciation on softwaresection 2(29ba)section 2(29)section 64first proviso to section 147section 115jb(2)r&d expendituresection 194jcomputer softwaresection 33section 40(a)(i)

Judgments citing Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1664/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1663/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1662/CHNY/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1627/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1625/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1624/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1623/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1622/CHNY/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…gly, the orders of both the authorities below in respect of depreciation on UPS are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. A similar view was taken by this Tribunal in Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. v. DCIT in 145 ITD 17. 55. The next issue arises for consideration is depreciation on EPABX. This issue arises for consideration in the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. 56. Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, the Ld. Sr. counsel for the assessee, submitted that EPABX is part and parcel of computer, therefore, eligible for depreciation at th…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2372/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deput…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1675/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deput…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1674/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deput…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1619/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deput…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1618/CHNY/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Cholamandalam Ms General Income Tax, V. Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, No.2, The Assistant Commissioner Of Nsc Bose Road, Income Tax. Chennai - 600 001. Large Taxpayer Unit, Chennai - 600 101. Pan : Aabcc 6633 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1674, 1675, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-08 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1366/Chny/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2372/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deput…

Turbo Energy Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 317/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

Turbo Energy Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 316/CHNY/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Turbo Energey Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 205/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Turbo Energey Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 204/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Turbo Energey Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 203/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Turbo Energy Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 629/CHNY/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…

Turbo Energy Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

ITA 351/CHNY/2013[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ng voltage to feed stabilizer output voltage to the connected instrument in addition to the uninterrupted power supply during the power failure with the help of batteries. The Ld.AR also relied on the following decisions: • Sundaram Asset Management (2013) 145 ITD 17 (Chennai) • Godrey Phillips India Ltd. • DCIT vs. Surface Finishing Equipment 11.2 Though there are decisions in favour of assessee the claim of the assessee that the UPS as an energy saving device is not acceptable. It is only an equipment for uninterrupted power supply to all the electrical appliances as held by the Ld.AO. However ITAT’C’ Benc…