Search: depreciation

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1076/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1078/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1846/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1883/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1077/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 967/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1272/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1062/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1063/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1059/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation from asst. yr. 1997-98 up to the asst. yr. 2001- 02 got carried forward to the asst. yr. 2002-03 and became part thereof, it came to be governed by the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 and were available for carry forward and set-off against the profits and gains of subsequent

RURAL EDUCATION AND ACTION FOR LIBERATION,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO WARD 1, VILLUPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1243/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1246/Chny/2019. "नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Ragavendra Rao

Section 11Section 32

127(SC), by which the hon’ble Supreme Court has affirmed the view taken by the Bombay High Court in CIT VS. INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION (IBPS) reported in [2003] 131 Taxman 386 (Bom). The relevant portion of the said judgement of the Bombay High Court (402 ITR 445) as quoted by the hon’ble Supreme Court and affirmed

RURAL EDUCATION AND ACTION FOR LIBERATION,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO WARD 1, VILLUPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1244/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1246/Chny/2019. "नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Ragavendra Rao

Section 11Section 32

127(SC), by which the hon’ble Supreme Court has affirmed the view taken by the Bombay High Court in CIT VS. INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION (IBPS) reported in [2003] 131 Taxman 386 (Bom). The relevant portion of the said judgement of the Bombay High Court (402 ITR 445) as quoted by the hon’ble Supreme Court and affirmed

ESSK EDUCATIONAL CHARITIES,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO WARD 1, VILLUPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1246/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1246/Chny/2019. "नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Ragavendra Rao

Section 11Section 32

127(SC), by which the hon’ble Supreme Court has affirmed the view taken by the Bombay High Court in CIT VS. INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION (IBPS) reported in [2003] 131 Taxman 386 (Bom). The relevant portion of the said judgement of the Bombay High Court (402 ITR 445) as quoted by the hon’ble Supreme Court and affirmed

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE vs. CHIRANJEEVI WIND ENERGY LIMITED, COIMBATORE

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2225/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

depreciation even prior to AY 2013-14. The copies of various decisions favoring the assessee have been placed on record. 6. Upon perusal of the decision of Chennai Tribunal in M. Satishkumar V/s DIT (33 Taxmann.com 396; 28.09.2012), we find that identical question has been decided by coordinate bench in assessee’s favor as under: - 9. We have heard

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE vs. M/S. BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LTD., COIMBATORE

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1289/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri.Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Manoj Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation even prior to AY 2013-14. The copies of various decisions favoring the assessee have been placed on record. 6. Upon perusal of the decision of Chennai Tribunal in M. Satishkumar V/s DIT (33 Taxmann.com 396 28.09.2012), we find that identical question has been decided by coordinate bench in assessee’s favor as under: - 9. We have heard

ROVERCO APPAREL COMPANY PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT COMPANY CIRCLE V(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 2652/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri, M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40

127,06,914/- after setting off carry forward business loss of 14,45,378/- pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 28.03.2013 determining the total income at `868,02,598/-. The assessee got partial relief before the Ld.CIT(A) against the additions made in this assessment Later both the Revenue

ESTRA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. ((NOW SUCCESSOR OF M/S. ROVERCO APPAREL COMPANY PVT LTD.) ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 2034/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri, M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40

127,06,914/- after setting off carry forward business loss of 14,45,378/- pertaining to assessment year 2009-10. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 28.03.2013 determining the total income at `868,02,598/-. The assessee got partial relief before the Ld.CIT(A) against the additions made in this assessment Later both the Revenue