S.P.MANI AND MOHAN DAIRY,ERODE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, ERODE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 41(1) merely because they remained unpaid for a sufficiently long time and that it is required of the revenue authorities to show that the liability to pay the creditors has ceased or has been remitted by the creditors". In fact, without confirming from the creditors, the cessation of liability will not be possible. ITA Nos.1321 & 1403/Chny/2018

TRIVITRON HEALTHCARE P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation of buildings. machinery, plant or furniture, being tangible assets or know-how, patents, copyrights. trademarks, licences franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature being intangible assets allowable to the predecessor and the successor in the case of succession referred to in clause (xiii), clause (xiiib) and clause (xiv) of section 41

M/S. SAKTHI FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

41, Shanmugamandram, Coimbatore. Race Course Road, (Presently: The Deputy Coimbatore – 641 018. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Coimbatore. PAN: AAAA S0957 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2076/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s.Sakthi Foundation, The Income Tax Officer, 180, Race Course Road, v. Company Ward -1, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore. (Presently: The Deputy

SOUTHER INDIA MILLS ASSOCIATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

41, Shanmugamandram, Coimbatore. Race Course Road, (Presently: The Deputy Coimbatore – 641 018. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Coimbatore. PAN: AAAA S0957 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2076/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s.Sakthi Foundation, The Income Tax Officer, 180, Race Course Road, v. Company Ward -1, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore. (Presently: The Deputy

BHARAT TECHNOLOGIES AUTO COMPONENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COMPANY WARD 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1841, 1842 & 1843/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2006-07 V. M/S. Bharat Technologies Auto – The Ito, Components Ltd., Company Ward-1(1), 177 Raheja Towers, Chennai. 7Th Floor, Unit No.708, Beta Wing, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcb 9835 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

depreciation of UPSL. ii) To exempt the company from the provisions of Section 41(1) and 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect

BHARAT TECHNOLOGIES AUTO COMPONENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COMPANY WARD 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1841, 1842 & 1843/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2006-07 V. M/S. Bharat Technologies Auto – The Ito, Components Ltd., Company Ward-1(1), 177 Raheja Towers, Chennai. 7Th Floor, Unit No.708, Beta Wing, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcb 9835 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

depreciation of UPSL. ii) To exempt the company from the provisions of Section 41(1) and 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect

BHARAT TECHNOLOGIES AUTO COMPONENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COMPANY WARD 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1841, 1842 & 1843/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2006-07 V. M/S. Bharat Technologies Auto – The Ito, Components Ltd., Company Ward-1(1), 177 Raheja Towers, Chennai. 7Th Floor, Unit No.708, Beta Wing, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcb 9835 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

depreciation of UPSL. ii) To exempt the company from the provisions of Section 41(1) and 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect

OLYMPIA TECH PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT - 4 , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.922/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Olympia Tech Park (Chennai) Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 1, Sidco Income Tax, Chennai-4, Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aabco8102F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.04.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai -4, Chennai, Dated 25.03.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

section 263 of the Act, after examining the assessment records, the ld. PCIT has noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation of ₹.17,41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.VANNIAPERUMAL & SONS,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. PCIT-2, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation to certain extent and in assessment year 2011-12 it was allowed at Rs.2,04,77,364/- as against claim made by assessee at Rs.8,19,09,459/- after considering the reply of assessee dated 15.02.2019 and analyzing the provisions of section 32 r.w.s 47(xiii), 48, 49 & 55 and sections 28 to 41

HAMEED MARINE PRIVATE LIMITED,EDALAKUDY, NAGERCOIL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGERCOIL, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NAGERCOIL

In the result, Grounds relating to validity of notice u/s 143(2) are dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

section 43 is wrong and cannot come to the aid of the department. He further submitted that the assessee had correctly claimed depreciation on the cost of second hand machinery paid by the assessee and is duly evidenced by the purchase bills along with the details of machinery furnished. Therefore, he prayed for allowing the depreciation claimed of Rs.31,41

R.RAVISHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

41 and in this section, unless -the context otherwise requires – (1) “actual cost” means the actual cost of the assets to the assessee, reduced by that portion of the cost thereof, if any, as has been met directly or indirectly by any other person or authority.” 5.5. The following paragraph from the Apex Court decision in the case of Challapalli

M/S T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAIVS.ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the assessee are\ndecided as under:-\n\n| ITA Nos\n| Assessment\nYear\nResult\n| IT(TP)A No

depreciable\nasset....\".\n\n19.0 On the principal controversy of allowance of deduction u/s.32AC\nof the Act to the appellant, the first issue that came up for our\nconsideration is as to whether the appellant meets the various criterion\nlaid down in section 32AC. We have noted that to be eligible for the\nsame the assessee ought to be engaged