Search: depreciation

ITA 1485/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2011-12

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

FRESH & HONEST CAFE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499 & 1500/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1485/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Fresh & Honest Café Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Company Circle Ii(1), 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaacf 1516 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

ITA 1499/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2009-10

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

FRESH & HONEST CAFE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499 & 1500/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1485/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Fresh & Honest Café Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Company Circle Ii(1), 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaacf 1516 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

ITA 206/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2016AY 2012-13

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

MEENAKSHI (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.206/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Meenakshi (India) Limited, The Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Shri T.N. Seetharaman, V. Income Tax, Advocate, Corporate Circle – 4(1), #384 (Old No.196), Lloyds Road, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 086. Pan : Aaacm 5386 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.B. Koli, JCIT

ITA 1789/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

AUTOMOTIVE COACHES & COMPONENTS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1789/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Automotive Coaches & The Deputy Commissioner Of Components Ltd., V. Income Tax, C1 & D6 Sipcot Industrial Company Circle – I, Complex, Chennai - 600 034. Gummidipoondi – 601 201. Pan : Aaaca 3150 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

TAGROS CHEMICALS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 703/CHNY/2015[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.703/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S Tagros Chemicals India Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of Jhaver Centre, Raja Annamalai V. Income Tax, Building, Corporate Circle – 3(1), 72 (Old No.19), Marshals Road, Chennai - 600 034. Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. Pan : Aaact 2952 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Unni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. H. Kabila, JCIT

ITA 1615/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03- 2005. Proviso to section

JCIT (OSD), CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1615/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Income M/S. India Piston Ltd., Tax (Osd), Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. Huzur Gardens, Room No. 512, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Madhavaram High Road, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Sembiam, Chennai 600 011. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaaci1439E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation permissible under the said section by resorting to the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act. The learned counsel however fairly pointed out before us that in the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, that very clause (iia

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ADDISON & COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 862/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 862/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri. Sahadevan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in 6 I.T.A. No.862/Mds/2016 which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03-2005. Proviso to section

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-8(1), LTU-II, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2379/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT

Section 14A

depreciation @ 20% in terms of Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Since the new plant 20% in terms of Section

M/S. I.P. RINGS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 2668/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri N. Madhavan, JCIT

depreciation permissible under the said section by resorting to the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act. The learned counsel however fairly pointed out 8 I.T.A. Nos.2583 & 2584 and 2667 & 2668/M/16 before us that in the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, that very clause (iia

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. I.P. RINGS. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 2583/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri N. Madhavan, JCIT

depreciation permissible under the said section by resorting to the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act. The learned counsel however fairly pointed out 8 I.T.A. Nos.2583 & 2584 and 2667 & 2668/M/16 before us that in the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, that very clause (iia

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. I.P. RINGS. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 2584/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri N. Madhavan, JCIT

depreciation permissible under the said section by resorting to the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act. The learned counsel however fairly pointed out 8 I.T.A. Nos.2583 & 2584 and 2667 & 2668/M/16 before us that in the second proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, that very clause (iia

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1591/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

ITA 1590/CHNY/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03-2005. Proviso to section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

ITA 1592/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03-2005. Proviso to section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

ITA 1593/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03-2005. Proviso to section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

ITA 2339/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

32(1)(iia) does not say that the year in which the additional depreciation has to be allowed. It simply says that the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation equal to 20% of the cost of the machinery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31-03-2005. Proviso to section

INDIA PISTONS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

ITA 2340/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

depreciation based on the decision of the Hon’ble Maras High court in the case of Brakes India Ltd which was not accepted by the Department and further appeal is pending the Apex Court. 3.3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the 3rd proviso of Section 32(1)(iia

INDIA PISTONS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

ITA 2383/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

depreciation based on the decision of the Hon’ble Maras High court in the case of Brakes India Ltd which was not accepted by the Department and further appeal is pending the Apex Court. 3.3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the 3rd proviso of Section 32(1)(iia

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

ITA 2384/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

depreciation based on the decision of the Hon’ble Maras High court in the case of Brakes India Ltd which was not accepted by the Department and further appeal is pending the Apex Court. 3.3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the 3rd proviso of Section 32(1)(iia

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.