“block of assets”

Frank S International Itl Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT(It), Circle (2)(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the

Bench: Shri. Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

issue that requires adjudication in the present appeal is whether the gain arising out of transfer of depreciable assets forming part of the block of assets should be treated as short term capital gain as per Section 50(1) of the Act or the rate of long term capital gain ... reference: "Sec. 50 Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (42A) of section 2, where the capital asset is an asset forming part of a block of assets in respect of which depreciation has been allowed under this Act or under the Indian Income- tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), the provisions

ACIT-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Financial Shared Services Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed and Cross

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

depreciation claimed on old server costing Rs.25 crores taken on financial lease, the asset had entered into the relevant block of assets in Assessment Year 2011-12. He submitted, as an owner of the asset, assessee had incurred the entire cost and put the asset to use. The assessee ... have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. As far as the depreciation claimed on the old server, it has entered the block of assets in Assessment Year 2011-12. It is observed, the Tribunal while deciding identical issue in assessee's own case in 5 ITA No.3333/Mum/2023 CO.No

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Surat Road King, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account Of expenses depreciation in respect of Block of assets amounting to Rs.2,50,69,971/- out of total depreciation claimed of Rs.4,32,05,874/- on Trucks without appreciating the facts brought on record ... registered in the name of partner for the sake of convenience but were purchased by the firm and are duly reflected in the block of asset of the firm. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee was convinced that the assessee has been using these trucks

ACIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

disallowing depreciation of Rs.5,88,509/-. 2.2. The CIT (A) ought to have held that once an asset forms part of block of assets, it loses its identity and depreciation on a particular asset cannot be worked out separately and disallowed." 7.1. The relevant facts in brief are that ... that the assets under consideration formed were originally used for the purpose of business of the Assessee and formed part of Block of Assets. As per Section 32 of the Act depreciation was to be allowed on the Written Down Value (WDV) of the Block of Asset as computed

Grasim Industries Ltd ( Corporate Finance Division), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

disallowing depreciation of Rs. 5,88,509/-. 2.2. The CIT (A) ought to have held that once an asset forms part of block of assets, it loses its identity and depreciation on a particular asset cannot be worked out separately and disallowed.” 7.1. The relevant facts in brief are that ... that the assets under consideration formed were originally used for the purpose of business of the Assessee and formed part of Block of Assets. As per Section 32 of the Act depreciation was to be allowed on the Written Down Value (WDV) of the Block of Asset as computed

Late Pravinchandra Dwarkadas Dalal (Legal Heir Hiten Pravinchandra Dalal), Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax It Circle 42(3)(1) Erstwhile Circle 33(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

transfer of immovable property is a short-term capital gain u/s. 50, since it is an asset which formed part of gross block of assets used by the assessee in his business on which depreciation was claimed up to Assessment Year 2003-04. According to him, merely because business operations ... assessee for depreciation for two years prior to the date of sale. We do not know how a depreciable asset forming part of block of assets within the meaning Section 2(11) of the Act can cease to be part of block of assets. The description of the asset

ACIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am

further noticed that, though, the assessee had reduced the Written Down Value (WDV) of the let-out premises from the value of block of assets, however, in course of assessment proceeding, the assessee claimed that it is entitled to depreciation on the entire block of assets without reducing ... under question was purchased by the assessee in the assessment year 1987- 88. Since its acquisition, the said property forms part of the block of assets for the purpose of claiming depreciation under the Act. It is the claim of the assessee that in the preceding years the assessee used

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am

further noticed that, though, the assessee had reduced the Written Down Value (WDV) of the let-out premises from the value of block of assets, however, in course of assessment proceeding, the assessee claimed that it is entitled to depreciation on the entire block of assets without reducing ... under question was purchased by the assessee in the assessment year 1987- 88. Since its acquisition, the said property forms part of the block of assets for the purpose of claiming depreciation under the Act. It is the claim of the assessee that in the preceding years the assessee used