“block of assets”

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Grasim Industires Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2001-02

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing the cost of the block of assets to be reduced by amount of subsidy treated as Capital receipt in view of explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Income

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir1(4), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2001-02

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing the cost of the block of assets to be reduced by amount of subsidy treated as Capital receipt in view of explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Income

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as stated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited Addl. Cit, Range 7(1) V. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Besant Road Worli, Mumbai - 400018 Mumbai Pan: Aaach2914F Appellant Respondent Assessee Represented By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Pranay Gandhi Revenue Represented By : Shri Rajneesh Yadav

book value to Ciba which issued shares to the shareholders of the assessee to preserve their wealth. The assets were retained in the block of assets under section 43(6)(c) of the Act, which provides for reduction of 'money's payable' in respect of sale, discardment or destruction only ... favor in AY 2000-01 wherein it have been held that the assessee would be eligible to claim depreciation on opening WDV of block of assets and the explanation 2A to Sec.43(6) would have no application. The Ld. DR has submitted that the revenue has preferred further appeal

Aarey Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground No. 3 urged by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

value of alleged bogus purchase of machinery is not applied, then the entire value of machinery should be reduced from the block of assets and in that view of the matter, the disallowance of depreciation made by the Assessing Officer would become justified. 10. Before us, the assessee

Alta Leasing & Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle 6 (1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

balance depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- were pertained to assets which had been shown in the opening block of the blocks of assets being WDV thereof. The assessee submitted that the depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- was worked out on the WDV of the assets of different nature ... these assets were leased out to various parties in the preceding years, therefore, assessee was entitled to depreciation on these assets under different block of assets as reflected in the books of accounts. After taking into consideration the facts and material on record the ld. CIT(A) observed that these

DCIT, Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. Alta Leasing & Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

balance depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- were pertained to assets which had been shown in the opening block of the blocks of assets being WDV thereof. The assessee submitted that the depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- was worked out on the WDV of the assets of different nature ... these assets were leased out to various parties in the preceding years, therefore, assessee was entitled to depreciation on these assets under different block of assets as reflected in the books of accounts. After taking into consideration the facts and material on record the ld. CIT(A) observed that these

DCIT.Cir.6 (1), Mumbai vs. M/S Alta Leasing & Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

balance depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- were pertained to assets which had been shown in the opening block of the blocks of assets being WDV thereof. The assessee submitted that the depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- was worked out on the WDV of the assets of different nature ... these assets were leased out to various parties in the preceding years, therefore, assessee was entitled to depreciation on these assets under different block of assets as reflected in the books of accounts. After taking into consideration the facts and material on record the ld. CIT(A) observed that these

Alta Leasing & Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl, CIT Cent. Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

balance depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- were pertained to assets which had been shown in the opening block of the blocks of assets being WDV thereof. The assessee submitted that the depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- was worked out on the WDV of the assets of different nature ... these assets were leased out to various parties in the preceding years, therefore, assessee was entitled to depreciation on these assets under different block of assets as reflected in the books of accounts. After taking into consideration the facts and material on record the ld. CIT(A) observed that these

Alta Leasing & Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. Jt CIT Spl RG 17, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

balance depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- were pertained to assets which had been shown in the opening block of the blocks of assets being WDV thereof. The assessee submitted that the depreciation of Rs.2,71,77,981/- was worked out on the WDV of the assets of different nature ... these assets were leased out to various parties in the preceding years, therefore, assessee was entitled to depreciation on these assets under different block of assets as reflected in the books of accounts. After taking into consideration the facts and material on record the ld. CIT(A) observed that these

West Gujarat Exdpress Way Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

assessee is in appeal before us. 6. During the course of hearing, learned Authorised Representative (‘learned AR‟) submitted that depreciation is allowable on block of assets at the rate applicable and tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative (‘learned

ACIT, Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. West Gujarat Express Way Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

assessee is in appeal before us. 6. During the course of hearing, learned Authorised Representative (‘learned AR‟) submitted that depreciation is allowable on block of assets at the rate applicable and tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative (‘learned

ACIT, Circle 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Eurofinance Traininf & Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

assessee that indexation was allowable to the assessee on sale of impugned capital asset even though the said capital asset was part of block of assets of the assessee on which depreciation had been claimed by the assessee and on which profit had been shown by the assessee as 'profit ... deed for the property sold and also filed working for capital gains. It was further observed that the said property was part of block of asset on which the assessee had claimed and has been allowed depreciation. However, in the return of income, the assessee has declared the capital gains

Dy CIT 10 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Navin Flourine International Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 6814/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dcit-10(3)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Navin Flourine Room No. 217/212, 1St International Ltd. Vs. 2Nd Floor, Suntech Centre, Near Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Churchgate, Mumbai- Garware Plastics, 37/40, 400020. Subhash Road, Vile Parle (E)], Mumbai-400057. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp0464B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Chetan M. Kacha (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Ms. Aastha Shah/Aamod Prabhudesai सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 17, Mumbai Dated 20.08.2019 For Ay. 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Brought To Our Notice That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Given Relief To The Assessee Against The Action Of The Ao Who Passed The Re-Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2015 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). According To The Ld. Ar, The Ao Passed The Re-Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2015 Pursuant To The Order Of The Ld. Cit-07, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act Dated 24.01.2014 Wherein The Ld. Cit Found Fault With The Action Of The Ao In Respect Of Original Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Dated 29.12.2011 Wherein The Ao A.Y. 2009-10 M/S. Navin Flourine International Ltd. Assessed The Total Income Of Assessee At Rs.71,09,93,779/-. The Ld Cit U/S 263 Of The Act Found Fault With The Original Assessment On The Following Four (4) Issues: -

purpose of computing the taxable income, and neither any adjustment been carried out in respect of "Impairment of fixed assets" under any block of assets nor has the depreciation attribution to the assets classified as “Impairment of Assets: been added back nor the receipt of ₹ 5550.47 lacs for phasing