EMGEE CABLES & COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, ground no. 1 of the

depreciation of A.Y. 2000-01 and A.Y. 2001-02 from “Income from other Sources” though the sub section 2 of section 32

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. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the amendment in clause (iia) of sub-section 1 of section 32 was inserted

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

depreciation under section 32 is restricted to the tangible intangible assets which are specifically enumerated therein and depreciation is not allowable

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 under section 32(1)(ii) and additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act during the course

SABOO SODIUM CHLORO LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation under Section 32 shall be mandatory. Therefore, the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001 would

SHRI DHARMENDRA KUMAR PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

32(1), no depreciation is admissible for land - judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Alps Theatre (supra). Secondly, the department can assess the company to short- term capital gains only qua depreciable assets which in the present case is the superstructure erected on the site [see section

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN ATIKSHAYA KESHTRA,PADAMPUA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1, KAILASH HEIGHTS

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Depreciation under section 32 Rs.1,89,824 3.8. The condition precedent to the exercise of the jurisdiction under section 147 is the formation

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)

section 32, i.e., deprecation are, therefore, applicable in case of income earned under the head 'profit and gains of business or profession'. Depreciation

ANAMIKA CONDUCTORS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

depreciation by ignoring the Explanation 5 to section 32 of IT Act under which the assessee company is legally entitled

CHURU ZILA SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD.,CHURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, JHUNJHUNU

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation as per Explanation (5) to Section 32 of the Act, therefore, non-consideration of the claim of depreciation on the part

RAJ KUMAR KANDOI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

depreciation on building, machinery, plant or furniture [section 32]; and  unabsorbed depreciation [section 32(2)]. (iv) Any other expenditure (not being

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 in view of section 32(1)(iii) read with section 43(1) and explanation 10 thereto. Thereafter, after taking

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 in view of section 32(1)(iii) read with section 43(1) and explanation 10 thereto. Thereafter, after taking

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 in view of section 32(1)(iii) read with section 43(1) and explanation 10 thereto. Thereafter, after taking

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 in view of section 32(1)(iii) read with section 43(1) and explanation 10 thereto. Thereafter, after taking

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 in view of section 32(1)(iii) read with section 43(1) and explanation 10 thereto. Thereafter, after taking

ANAMIKA CONDUCTORS PVT. LTD. ,JAIPUR vs. ACITDCIT, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

7. In view of the above reasons and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 32 of the Act pertains to depreciation. It provides that deductions as specified in clause(i) of sub-section

DYNAMIC POWERTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation, if any, under any provision of section 32, except clause (iia) of sub-section (1) of the said section