Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

73 ITD 150Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2000#3395 most cited

What is Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT authority for?

A valuation report furnished by the assessee for the cost of assets cannot be ignored if the Assessing Officer has not appointed his own valuer, has not examined the assessee's valuer, and has no other evidence to show the report is unreliable. Similarly, Explanation 3 to Section 43(1) can only be invoked if the Assessing Officer believes the fair market value was inflated to claim excess depreciation.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT · section 43(1) · written down value · valuation report · registered valuer · Assessing Officer · excess depreciation · cost of assets

Issues it is cited on

section 32aopening wdvsection 43(1)written down valueblock of assetsput to userule 46asection 43breopening of assessmentgenuineness of the transactiontransfersection 147

Judgments citing Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2280/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2279/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2278/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2277/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2276/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2275/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

M/S. V.V.Vanniaperumal & Sons, Virudhunagar vs. PCIT-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1765/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant. The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Ahd) 25 : (2000) 73 ITD 150 (Ahd) is also considered relevant as in above case, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee’s valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no other evidence to show tha…

Indus League Clothing Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(4), Bengaluru

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 82/BANG/2018[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Nov 2021AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri L Bharath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 43(1)

…ited v. DCIT (29 taxmann.com 89) (p. 39 para 3.5 of the case law compilation volume 2); e. DCIT v. S.V.P.B. Spinners (P.) Ltd. (82 taxmann.com 278) (p. 48-54, para 11-16 of the case law compilation volume 2); Page 7 of 12 f. Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. DCIT (73 ITD 150) (p. 70, para 19 of the case law compilation volume 2); g. Chitra Publicity Company (P) Ltd.v. ACIT (127 TTJ 1 (Ahmedabad)) (p. 137, para 17.2-25 of the case law compilation volume 2); h. Ashwin Vanaspati Industries v. CIT (125 Taxman 59) (p. 149-150, para 20 of the case law compilation volume 2); i. ACIT v. Karma Energy Ltd. (33 taxmann.com 580)…

M/S. Pik Studios P. Ltd (Formerly Known As Pik Pen Private Limited), Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 6681/MUM/2018[1999-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2020AY 1999-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh.

Section 154Section 32Section 43(1)

…No.2470/Mum/2017. therefore, the rejection of the valuation report furnished by the assessee is not correct. For this proposition, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd vs. DCIT [2000] 73 ITD 150 (Ahd.) and the judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ashwin Vanaspati Industries vs. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 26 (Guj). These decisions suggest for accepting the valuation report furnished by the assessee and depreciation should be granted on the enhanced cost of the asset. 9. Further, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attenti…

M/S Volvo India Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1537/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153(1)Section 18

…d if in his opinion the written down value was the actual cost, he ought to have supported the same by placing sufficient evidence so as to dislodge the valuation report of the registered valuer. Similarly in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT 48. 73 ITD 150 (Ahd.), it was held that Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Act could be invoked only if the Assessing Officer was of the view that fair market value of assets had been inflated to claim excess depreciation; where fair market value of asset had been certified by registered valuer and the assessing officer had not appointed his own valuer for va…

Dharmanandan Diamonds P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7478/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Dharmanandan Diamonds Dcit-5(1)(2) Private Limited Aaykar Bhawan Fe 7011-12, Bharat Diamond M.K.Road Vs. Bourse, Bkc Bandra (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri R.C. Modi &For Respondent: Nishant Samaiya
Section 170Section 47

…ld that Expln. 3 to s. 43(1) had no application to the case as the main purpose of the transfer of assets was not reduction of tax liability. The decision is relevant The other decision of the Tribunal in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2000] 73 ITD 150 (Ahdi) Is also considered relevant as in above ease, valuation report furnished by the assessee in support of cost of the assets acquired was accepted by the Tribunal, as AO did not appoint his own valuer nor thought it necessary to examine assessee's valuer. In the absence of any other valuation report and there being no Other evidence to show th…

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT Spl. RG. - 2, Mumbai

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 7148/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

Tata Motors Ltd vs. DCIT RG - 2(1)

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

M/S Pik Pen Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-8(2)(4), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4437/MUM/2013[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

Section 32Section 43(1)

…on this issue and therefore, the rejection of the valuation report furnished by the assessee is not correct. For this proposition, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd vs. DCIT [2000] 73 ITD 150 (Ahd.) and the judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ashwin Vanaspati Industries vs. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 26 (Guj). These decisions suggest for accepting the valuation report furnished by the assessee and depreciation should be granted on the enhanced cost of the asset. 9. Further, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attenti…

Pik Pen P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, 9 appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7230/MUM/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2015AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singhi.T.A. No.7230/M/2012 (Assessment Year: 1999-2000)

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. Shivram, ShriFor Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt
Section 32Section 43(1)

…on this issue and therefore, the rejection of the valuation report furnished by the assessee is not correct. For this proposition, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Unimed Technologies Ltd vs. DCIT [2000] 73 ITD 150 (Ahd.) and the judgment of the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ashwin Vanaspati Industries vs. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 26 (Guj). These decisions suggest for accepting the valuation report furnished by the assessee and depreciation should be granted on the enhanced cost of the asset. 9. Further, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attentio…