HARBANS LAL SETHI,JAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

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

Depreciation Depreciation only) only) Note: NP rate shown is before/subject to interest and depreciation etc. It is evident from the above

JAIPUR TELECOM PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

depreciation, however, as regards quantum of depreciation is concerned, he was of the view that depreciation should be charged on WDV as computed

JAIPUR TELECOM PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

depreciation, however, as regards quantum of depreciation is concerned, he was of the view that depreciation should be charged on WDV as computed

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

depreciation on plant & machinery furniture, computers which is used in the educational institutions; it has not claimed the depreciation on land

COMPUCOM SOFTWARE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

Depreciation Claimed Depreciation should be No. claimed Rate of Depreciation Rate of Depreciation Depreciation Depreciation 1 Supply of WEC 30000000 40% 120000000 40% 12000000 40% 40% 2 Transportation

SAVITRI LEASING FINANCE LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

depreciation has unabsorbed depreciation and carried it forward so the claim of the appellant that the depreciation has not been

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,VIDYUT BHAWAN, JAN PATH, JYOTI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, , JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

depreciation debited to P&L A/c is required to be added and thereafter depreciation excluding depreciation on account of revaluation

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation of Rs.46,630/- on windmill by treating the civil work & foundation as building on which depreciation is allowed @ 10% and electrical

SHRI VIKRAM SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Depreciation— Depreciation granted in original assessment—In the earlier year, depreciation was disallowed on the ground that the asset did not exist

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS AND FEBRICATIONS PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT CIR-1 KOTA , KOTA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

depreciation and interest claimed on vehicles: Assessee has claimed interest expenses and depreciation on multiple vehicles. When the assessee was asked

M/S BALAJI CONSTRUCTION,AJMER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, AJMER

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation in full & hence no intention to charge higher depreciation byassessee firm and there is no mistake apparent on face

ITO(E), JAIPUR vs. MAYURA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation as application of income, even not treating depreciation as application of income for charitable purposes, if depreciation Rs. 3,09,169 +surplus

SHRI SURESH CHAND AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

depreciation is 15% as against 30% claimed by the assessee. Therefore, the AO disallowed excess depreciation amounting to Rs.1,42,238/- and added

SHRI SURESH CHAND AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

depreciation is 15% as against 30% claimed by the assessee. Therefore, the AO disallowed excess depreciation amounting to Rs.1,42,238/- and added

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

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

depreciation u/s 32 can be allowed on non-existing assets and accordingly he confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the non-existing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

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

depreciation u/s 32 can be allowed on non-existing assets and accordingly he confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the non-existing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

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

depreciation u/s 32 can be allowed on non-existing assets and accordingly he confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the non-existing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

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

depreciation u/s 32 can be allowed on non-existing assets and accordingly he confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the non-existing