VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

disallowance of Rs.212,15,413 under section l4A read with Rule 8D of the Rules in computing book profit under section 115J8 of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO/DRP erred in allowing claim of additional depreciation amounting to Rs.17,12,04,096 under section 32(1)(iia

VEDANTA LTD ,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

32(1)(iia) of the Act and hence to this extent this allowance has been made doubly. 63. The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the claim has been disallowed merely on the ground that the claim of depreciation has been disallowed under section

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

Section 32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

AREVA T & D INDIA LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the assessee and

disallowed the depreciation, inter alia, on the ground that the depreciation under Section 32(2)(ii) is not applicable to “goodwill” as the legislature had specifically excluded “goodwill” as capital assets eligible for benefit of the provisions of Section 32. (vi) The assessee Company invoked the jurisdiction of the CIT(A) challenging the validity of the assessment order

DCIT, INT. TAX. CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LIMITED, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals preferred by the assessee as well as the Revenue

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh[A.Y.: 2015-16] & [A.Y.: 2016-17]

disallowed the assessee’s claim by holding the additional claim as mandatory under Explanation 5 to Section 32(1)(iia

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. JCIT,(OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals preferred by the assessee as well as the Revenue

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh[A.Y.: 2015-16] & [A.Y.: 2016-17]

disallowed the assessee’s claim by holding the additional claim as mandatory under Explanation 5 to Section 32(1)(iia

DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HALDIRAM SNACKS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

32(1)(iia) in AY 2007-08 but disallowed balance 10% depreciation in AY 2008-09. On these facts, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held as under:- “7. Clause (iia) of Section

VIBRACOUSTIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT,SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmavibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit R-561, Shankar Road, Special Range-9 New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi - 110011

32(1)(iia) of the Act. Assessee was asked to show-cause as to why additional depreciation should not be disallowed. Assessee inter alia submitted that the additional depreciation @10% was on the plant and machinery and mould purchased between 2nd Oct 2013 to 31st March 2014 in F.Y. 2014-15. It was further submitted that since in that year

VIBRACOUSTIC INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT,SPECIAL RANGE-9, NEW DELHI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmavibracoustic India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit R-561, Shankar Road, Special Range-9 New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi

32(1)(iia) of the Act. Assessee was asked to show-cause as to why additional depreciation should not be disallowed. Assessee inter alia submitted that the additional depreciation @10% was on the plant and machinery and mould purchased between 2nd Oct 2012 to 31st March 2013 in F.Y. 2013-14. It was further submitted that since in that year

M/S. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

disallowance of Rs. 5,91,106/- on account of additional depreciation claimed by the appellant under section 32(1)(iia

CIT-7

disallowed, a written submission was filed by the Assessee on 2nd December 2010 through its authorized representative (‘AR’) stating as under: "As per section 32(1)(iia

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

disallowance accordingly. 9 Section 43(1) reads as under: “43. In sections 28 to 41 and in this section, unless the context otherwise requires— ITA No.316/Del/2013 (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

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

disallowance accordingly. 9 Section 43(1) reads as under: “43. In sections 28 to 41 and in this section, unless the context otherwise requires— ITA No.316/Del/2013 (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