ADP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.: 2670, 2671, 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Adp India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Thamarai Tech Park, 6Th Floor, Vs. Income Tax, Sp Plot No. 16 To 20 & 20A, Thiru Vi Ka Corporate Circle 1(1), Industrial Estate, Inner Ring Road, Chennai. Guindy Industrial Estate So, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. [Pan: Aadcm-5547-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin, Cit & Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: These Four Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Four Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (All Dated 21.08.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. Ita Nos.2670 To 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024

depreciation on goodwill, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). Thus, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and the addition made by the Assessing Officer stands deleted for all the assessment years under consideration. ITA Nos.2670 to 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024 18. The next ground raised by the assessee in ground Nos. 3.1 to 3.6 for the assessment year

M/S. SUN EDITION SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 6 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 391 to 394 and all other applicable provisions, if any, of the Act and without any further act or deed shall stand transferred to and vested in and/or be deemed to be transferred to and vested in the Resulting Company as a going concern so as to vest in the Resulting Company all rights, title and interest pertaining

M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 391 to 394 and all other applicable provisions, if any, of the Act and without any further act or deed shall stand transferred to and vested in and/or be deemed to be transferred to and vested in the Resulting Company as a going concern so as to vest in the Resulting Company all rights, title and interest pertaining

M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 391 to 394 and all other applicable provisions, if any, of the Act and without any further act or deed shall stand transferred to and vested in and/or be deemed to be transferred to and vested in the Resulting Company as a going concern so as to vest in the Resulting Company all rights, title and interest pertaining

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-6(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUN EDISON SOLAR POWER INDIA PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2015-16 is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 391 to 394 and all other applicable provisions, if any, of the Act and without any further act or deed shall stand transferred to and vested in and/or be deemed to be transferred to and vested in the Resulting Company as a going concern so as to vest in the Resulting Company all rights, title and interest pertaining

ADP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

depreciation on goodwill is a possible view,\nbecause when 5th proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, has no application to the\ngiven facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer cannot take any\nview, which is contrary to provisions of section 32(1) of the Act. Since, the\nAssessing Officer has taken one of the possible view

ADP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

depreciation on goodwill is a possible view,\nbecause when 5th proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, has no application to the\ngiven facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer cannot take any\nview, which is contrary to provisions of section 32(1) of the Act. Since, the\nAssessing Officer has taken one of the possible view

HARITA FEHRER LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT SALARY CIRCLE II , CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

Section 43(1) extends the meaning of 'actual cost' in certain circumstances and grants power to the Assessing Officer to determine the actual cost in the hands of the assessee. The professional service for formulation, development, process support and engineering support was capitalized towards acquisition of in-house blending unit which was a colorable device to claim additional depreciation

HARITA FAHRER LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIR-2(2), CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

Section 43(1) extends the meaning of 'actual cost' in certain circumstances and grants power to the Assessing Officer to determine the actual cost in the hands of the assessee. The professional service for formulation, development, process support and engineering support was capitalized towards acquisition of in-house blending unit which was a colorable device to claim additional depreciation

HARITA FAHRER LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIR-2(2), CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

Section 43(1) extends the meaning of 'actual cost' in certain circumstances and grants power to the Assessing Officer to determine the actual cost in the hands of the assessee. The professional service for formulation, development, process support and engineering support was capitalized towards acquisition of in-house blending unit which was a colorable device to claim additional depreciation

HARITA FEHRER LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 2 (2),, CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

Section 43(1) extends the meaning of 'actual cost' in certain circumstances and grants power to the Assessing Officer to determine the actual cost in the hands of the assessee. The professional service for formulation, development, process support and engineering support was capitalized towards acquisition of in-house blending unit which was a colorable device to claim additional depreciation

ACIT, ERODE vs. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (INDIA) LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

depreciation. The relevant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogowa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 is extracted below for reference: 17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections

ACIT, ERODE vs. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (INDIA) LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

depreciation. The relevant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogowa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 is extracted below for reference: 17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections

ACIT, ERODE vs. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (INDIA) LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

depreciation. The relevant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogowa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 is extracted below for reference: 17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections

ACIT, ERODE vs. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (INDIA) LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

depreciation. The relevant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogowa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 is extracted below for reference: 17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections

ACIT, ERODE vs. SKM EGG PRODUCTS EXPORT (INDIA) LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

depreciation. The relevant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogowa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 is extracted below for reference: 17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE, MADURAI vs. M/S RAMCO SYSTEMS LIMITED, RAJAPALAYAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

391/- and adjusted/setoff\nunabsorbed depreciation to such extent, resulting NIL taxable income.\n4.\nMeanwhile, the AO issued impugned notice u/s.148 of the Act on\n30.03.2016 by taking note that the assessee company had set off\nunabsorbed depreciation loss related to AY 2000-01 of Rs.1,22,19,604/-\nwith current business income and unabsorbed depreciation loss related

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. T. STANES & COMPANY LTD., COIMBATORE

In the result, for the AY 2011-12, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and for the AY 2010-11, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.888/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

391/- as expenditure (net amount of Rs. 432.67-373.76). The assessee did not furnish the proof and details regarding the expenditure incurred by the company. It is the duty of the assessee to produce necessary evidence to show that the entire expenditure is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. ITA No.888 & 1386/Mds./2015 :- 6 -: In this case

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. T.STANES AND COMPANY LIMITED, COIMBATORE

In the result, for the AY 2011-12, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and for the AY 2010-11, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.888/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

391/- as expenditure (net amount of Rs. 432.67-373.76). The assessee did not furnish the proof and details regarding the expenditure incurred by the company. It is the duty of the assessee to produce necessary evidence to show that the entire expenditure is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. ITA No.888 & 1386/Mds./2015 :- 6 -: In this case