← All Phrases

“opening WDV”

DepreciationSection 43(6)Section 43(6)263 judgments

The decision most relied on for opening WDV is ACIT v. Progressive Constructions Ltd. (92 Taxmann.com 104), cited in 63 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on opening WDV

ACIT v. Progressive Constructions Ltd.
92 Taxmann.com 104 · 2018 · ITAT
63
citing judgments

Rights acquired under a concession agreement for highway construction, which generate revenue through toll collections, constitute an 'intangible asset' under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, eligible for depreciation, typically at 25%. This includes claiming depreciation on the opening Written Down Value (WDV) for such highway projects.

CIT v. Artex Manufacturing Co.
227 ITR 260 · 1997 · Supreme Court
36
citing judgments

In a slump sale, the slump purchase price cannot be apportioned among individual assets for claiming depreciation, as there is no indication of the price attributable to specific assets out of the total sale consideration.

DCIT v. Toyo Engineering India ltd.
33 Taxmann.com 560 · 2013 · Reported
22
citing judgments

Depreciation is not allowed on goodwill if it arises from book entries and has no identifiable cost of acquisition. This applies even when goodwill is acquired as part of a scheme of arrangement or amalgamation.

Bodal Chemicals Ltd. v. ACIT, Ahmedabad
112 Taxmann.com 217 · 2019 · ITAT
16
citing judgments

Once depreciation on an asset is allowed in the first year, the revenue is debarred from denying depreciation on the written-down value carried forward in subsequent years, absent a change in facts or law.

PCIT v. GVK Jaipur Expressway
100 Taxmann.com 96 · 2018 · Supreme Court
13
citing judgments

The Supreme Court has affirmed that developers of roadways, operating on a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) basis, are eligible to claim depreciation on the roads constructed. This decision supports the assessee's claim against the Revenue's challenge.

Judgments citing opening WDV

DCIT, Central Circle-02, Delhi, Jhandewalan vs. Otsuka Chemical India Pvt. Ltd., Abhinash Mansion

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2501/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 28Section 9

been corrected and due taxes have been paid. The submission of the assessee before the Assessing Officer is as under: “Regarding difference between opening WDV of fixed assets as per ITR of current year and closing written down value of fixed assets as per ITR of the preceding year ... submitted that closing WDV of fixed assets as per return form of A.Y. 2016-17 was Rs.913681910/- (return form enclosed at Annexure E) and opening WDV of fixed asset as on 01.04.2017 was Rs 959889103/- (return form enclosed at Annexure-B). The reason for difference in both the figures

Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

ITA 372/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

For Appellant: Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate and Pooja Saraf, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 156Section 32(1)Section 92C

circumstances of the case, the authorities below grossly erred in disallowing the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs. 118,51,19,424/- on the opening WDV of goodwill for the assessment year 2017-18 and the disallowance made is liable to be deleted. Ground 4(b): That the purported findings ... authorities below disallowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 118,51,19,424/- on the opening WDV of goodwill for the assessment year 2017-18 are wholly arbitrary, erroneous, unreasonable and perverse. Ground 4(c): That the authorities below erred in not considering the various submissions made by the appellant

Primetals Technologies India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

ITA 371/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

For Appellant: Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate and Pooja Saraf, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 156Section 32(1)Section 92C

circumstances of the case, the authorities below grossly erred in disallowing the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs. 118,51,19,424/- on the opening WDV of goodwill for the assessment year 2017-18 and the disallowance made is liable to be deleted. Ground 4(b): That the purported findings ... authorities below disallowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 118,51,19,424/- on the opening WDV of goodwill for the assessment year 2017-18 are wholly arbitrary, erroneous, unreasonable and perverse. Ground 4(c): That the authorities below erred in not considering the various submissions made by the appellant

Seikh Abubakkar Warish, Kanaidanga vs. PCIT, Asansol.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 915/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(2)Section 263

block at Rs. 97,92,020/-. He also noticed that the schedule DPM of the said ITR-4, it is seen that opening WDV is given as Rs. 79,88,706/- and addition of Rs. 41,09,912/- had been made 3 AY: 2016-17 Seikh Abubakkar Warish during year

Assistant Commissioner of Income- 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Keva Fragrances Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2017-

ITA 3482/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh BhatFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32Section 55

claim in the year under consideration is merely academic, as in this year the depreciation on “Goodwill” is to be calculated on its opening WDV. Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), and the same is upheld. As a result, the grounds

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Keva Fragrances Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2017-

ITA 3480/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh BhatFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32Section 55

claim in the year under consideration is merely academic, as in this year the depreciation on “Goodwill” is to be calculated on its opening WDV. Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), and the same is upheld. As a result, the grounds

The Institute of India Foundrymen, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Exempt, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1230/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

would amount to double deduction. 27. The Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order on this issue by holding that there is no opening WDV for this year. 18 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen 28. After hearing the rival

The Institute of Indian Foundrymen., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Exempt, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1229/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

would amount to double deduction. 27. The Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order on this issue by holding that there is no opening WDV for this year. 18 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen 28. After hearing the rival

The Institute of Indian Foundrymen, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Exempt, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1228/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

would amount to double deduction. 27. The Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order on this issue by holding that there is no opening WDV for this year. 18 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen 28. After hearing the rival

M/S Coastal Energen Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1483/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1481/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1482/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1483/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Coastal Energen Private Limited Acit बनाम No.5, Bhuhari Building, Moores Road, Central Circle-1(1), / Vs. Egmore, Chennai-600 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcc-0886-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 14-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16 To 2017-18 Arise Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-10-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao]

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 32Section 43(6)

assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year is only after reducing the amount received back ... assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year would obviously have to be after reducing the amount

M/S Coastal Energen Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1482/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1481/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1482/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1483/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Coastal Energen Private Limited Acit बनाम No.5, Bhuhari Building, Moores Road, Central Circle-1(1), / Vs. Egmore, Chennai-600 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcc-0886-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 14-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16 To 2017-18 Arise Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-10-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao]

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 32Section 43(6)

assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year is only after reducing the amount received back ... assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year would obviously have to be after reducing the amount

M/S Coastal Energen Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1481/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1481/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1482/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1483/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Coastal Energen Private Limited Acit बनाम No.5, Bhuhari Building, Moores Road, Central Circle-1(1), / Vs. Egmore, Chennai-600 004. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcc-0886-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 14-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16 To 2017-18 Arise Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 31-10-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao]

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 32Section 43(6)

assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year is only after reducing the amount received back ... assets are purchased during the relevant AY, the written down value is taken as the actual cost to the assessee and not from the opening WDV as claimed by the assessee. The actual cost of the assets purchased during the year would obviously have to be after reducing the amount

The Institute of Indian Foundrymen, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Exempt, Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

would amount to double deduction. 27. The Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order on this issue by holding that there is no opening WDV for this year. 28. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that up to AY 2015-16 even if fixed

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1910/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

noted from perusal of the Fixed Assets & Depreciation Schedule of M/s. Geluvu/GFP (received from AO with the 2"! remand report) that M/s. Geluvu had opening WDV of Plant & Machinery (P&M) as on 01.04.2005 to the tune of Rs.14,06,06,147/- and the addition during the year was only

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1909/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No. 1905 To 1910/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2021-22) बिधम / Dcit, Central Circle – 2(2) M/S Esskay Niryat Corp Old Cgo Bldg, 806, 8Th Pvt Ltd., Vs. Floor, Mk Road, Mumbai – Unit No. 101, 201 & 106, 400020. 206 Yamuna Sdf Complex, Phase Ii, Kasez Ghandhidham, Kutch, Gujrat – 370230 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaffe2263G (अपीलार्थी (प्रत्यर्थी / Appellant) .. / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal A/W Shri Gagan Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Biswanath Das, Cit –Dr & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

noted from perusal of the Fixed Assets & Depreciation Schedule of M/s. Geluvu/GFP (received from AO with the 2nd remand report) that M/s. Geluvu had opening WDV of Plant & Machinery (P&M) as on 01.04.2005 to the tune of Rs.14,06,06,147/- and the addition during the year was only

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1908/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

noted from perusal of the Fixed Assets & Depreciation Schedule of M/s. Geluvu/GFP (received from AO with the 2"! remand report) that M/s. Geluvu had opening WDV of Plant & Machinery (P&M) as on 01.04.2005 to the tune of Rs.14,06,06,147/- and the addition during the year was only

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1907/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

noted from perusal of the Fixed Assets & Depreciation Schedule of M/s. Geluvu/GFP (received from AO with the 2"! remand report) that M/s. Geluvu had opening WDV of Plant & Machinery (P&M) as on 01.04.2005 to the tune of Rs.14,06,06,147/- and the addition during the year was only

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

ITA 1906/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM & SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1905/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

noted from perusal of the Fixed Assets & Depreciation Schedule of M/s. Geluvu/GFP (received from AO with the 2nd remand report) that M/s. Geluvu had opening WDV of Plant & Machinery (P&M) as on 01.04.2005 to the tune of Rs.14,06,06,147/- and the addition during the year was only

Addl CIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sanofi India Limited (Formerly Known As M/S. Aventis Pharma Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 6698/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &
Section 32Section 32(1)

held as under: - “15. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. It evident, assessee's claim of depreciation on the opening WDV of block of assets has been disallowed simply for the reason that similar claim made by the assessee in preceding assessment years has been disallowed