ERNAKULAM REGIONAL COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNIONS LTD.,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2012-13

section 32(1)(iia) which as submitted is mandatory in nature. It may also be noted that there is no provision in the Act providing that balance 50 % will not be allowed in succeeding year. Reducing grant from WDV for purpose of depreciation The assessee during the year received a grant of Rs.3,72,68,000 towards purchase of plant

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

1)(iia) of the Act on the ground that the plant and machinery was acquired and put to use during the previous year relevant to AY 2012- 13. Since the assets were put to use for less than 180 days, additional depreciation was allowed only at 10% as per second proviso to section 32 of the Act. Balance additional depreciation

THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.NITTA GELATINE INDIA LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is a one-time benefit to encourage industrialization and the relevant provisions have to be construed reasonably and purposively. The additional depreciation is allowed in the year of purchase and if in the year of purchase, the assessee is eligible only for 50 per cent, depreciation, the balance

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.NITTA GELATINE INDIA LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is a one-time benefit to encourage industrialization and the relevant provisions have to be construed reasonably and purposively. The additional depreciation is allowed in the year of purchase and if in the year of purchase, the assessee is eligible only for 50 per cent, depreciation, the balance

CHERIAN VARKEY CONSTRUCTION CO.(P) LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) for the machinery used for manufacturing Ready Mix Concrete? (iii) Whether on the facts

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR vs. M/S.KERALA COMMUNICATORS CABLE LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

section 32 including building when the rate of depreciation on building is only 10% and not 100%. The equipments like STB can be considered, if at all admissible for depreciation, to be @ 15% under the "Plant & Machinery" and not @ 100%. In this view of the matter, if at all depreciation can be treated as admissible, it shall not exceed

DIADORA SHOES PVT LTD,CALICUT vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), CALICUT

In the result, the assessee’sappeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasdiadora Shoes Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Cit, Circle - 2 Vkc Tower, Kolathra P.O Calicut 673001 Vs. Calicut 673655 [Pan:Aabcd9692D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 32(1)(ii) by Finance Act, 2015, w.e.f. 01.04.2016, is retrospective in nature? While the assessee before us relies on the decisions in the following cases, the Revenue relies on the decision in Pr. CIT vs. Era Infrastructure(India) Ltd. [2022] 141 taxmann.com 289 (Del) (copy on record), rendered relying on the decision in Sedco Forex International Drill

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD, KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

iii) Disallowance u/s.14A – AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 Additional depreciation claimed by the assessee u/s. 32(1)(iia) 3. The assessee is a public sector undertaking engaged in building, repair and maintenance work of ships. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by making certain disallowances. Later, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation on plant & machinery

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD, KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

iii) Disallowance u/s.14A – AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 Additional depreciation claimed by the assessee u/s. 32(1)(iia) 3. The assessee is a public sector undertaking engaged in building, repair and maintenance work of ships. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by making certain disallowances. Later, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation on plant & machinery

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD, KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

iii) Disallowance u/s.14A – AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 Additional depreciation claimed by the assessee u/s. 32(1)(iia) 3. The assessee is a public sector undertaking engaged in building, repair and maintenance work of ships. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by making certain disallowances. Later, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation on plant & machinery

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD, KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

iii) Disallowance u/s.14A – AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 Additional depreciation claimed by the assessee u/s. 32(1)(iia) 3. The assessee is a public sector undertaking engaged in building, repair and maintenance work of ships. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by making certain disallowances. Later, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation on plant & machinery

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD, KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

iii) Disallowance u/s.14A – AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 Additional depreciation claimed by the assessee u/s. 32(1)(iia) 3. The assessee is a public sector undertaking engaged in building, repair and maintenance work of ships. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) by making certain disallowances. Later, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation on plant & machinery

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

iii) Computer Graphics Ltd. (supra) IT(TP)A Nos.475 & 134/Coch/2016. 32 M/s.US Technology Resources Pvt.Ltd. 20.9 In our considered opinion, benefit test is not a precondition for justifying arm's length price. Under Rule 10B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 which deals with 'Determination of the arm's length price'. there is no mention of the 'benefit test' being

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

iii) Computer Graphics Ltd. (supra) IT(TP)A Nos.475 & 134/Coch/2016. 32 M/s.US Technology Resources Pvt.Ltd. 20.9 In our considered opinion, benefit test is not a precondition for justifying arm's length price. Under Rule 10B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 which deals with 'Determination of the arm's length price'. there is no mention of the 'benefit test' being

THE ACIT CIR-1(1), THRISSUR vs. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the appeal filed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

iii) or sub-clause (iv) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term finance for - I.T.A. Nos.215&219/Coch/2018 (A) industrial or agricultural development (B) Development of Infrastructure facility in India; or (C ) Development of Housing in India (ii) in respect of the specified entity referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term

SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE ACIT CIR-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee as well as the appeal filed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

iii) or sub-clause (iv) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term finance for - I.T.A. Nos.215&219/Coch/2018 (A) industrial or agricultural development (B) Development of Infrastructure facility in India; or (C ) Development of Housing in India (ii) in respect of the specified entity referred to in sub-clause (v) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.KUNNEL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS P. LTD, KOCHI

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

iii) DCIT v Manish M Chheda 29 SOT 138 – Mumbai ITAT 7.2.3 In the above case, the Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal was considering the applicability of section 28(iv) of the I T Act. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that during the course of assessee’s profession, a sum of Rs.29,60,000/- was realised/collected

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

depreciation. (h) the amount of deferred tax and the provision therefor; (i) the amount or amounts set aside as provision for diminution in the value of any asset, (j) the amount standing in revaluation reserve relating to revalued asset on the retirement or disposal of such asset. Prior to the substitution, clause (i) and the proviso read as under

M/S ASPINWALL & CO.,LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

depreciation. (h) the amount of deferred tax and the provision therefor; (i) the amount or amounts set aside as provision for diminution in the value of any asset, (j) the amount standing in revaluation reserve relating to revalued asset on the retirement or disposal of such asset. Prior to the substitution, clause (i) and the proviso read as under