COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI RUPESH ANAND

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

32 was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986 w.e.f. 1.4.1988. This was done when the concept of depreciation on individual asset was changed to depreciation on the block of assets. When Parliament introduced depreciation on block of assets, sub-section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI RUPESH

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

32 was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986 w.e.f. 1.4.1988. This was done when the concept of depreciation on individual asset was changed to depreciation on the block of assets. When Parliament introduced depreciation on block of assets, sub-section

M/S PADMINI PRODUCTS (P) LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the aforesaid

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act cannot be allowed. It was further held that depreciation is only

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

depreciation allowance on the ground that section 32 is not applicable to the assessee. We hold that even if section

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A) vs. M/S AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

depreciation allowance on the ground that section 32 is not applicable to the assessee. We hold that even if section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S RITTAL INDIA PVT LTD.,

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 32(1)(iia), read with second proviso to 32(1)(ii) of the Act, for the assessment year 2007-08, the respondent- assessee could have been, and was granted benefit of 50% of 3 the 20% of the amount of depreciation

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SRI ADICHUNCHUNAGIRI SHIKSHANA TRUST

In the result, all the appeals are

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL)

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA REDDY JANASANGHA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI ADICHUNCHUNGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. AL-AMEEN CHARITABLE FUND TRUST

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation has to be computed in terms of Section 32 of the Act. He also places reliance on Section 37 of the Act to point

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CISCO SYSTEMS

The appeals are allowed; the impugned

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 32 of the Act of 1961 reads as under; “32. (1) In respect of depreciation of— (i) buildings, machinery

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 32 of the Act deals with depreciation. For our purpose, the following portion of Section 32 is relevant, which

HEWLETT-PACKARD INDIA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation on leased assets under Section 32 of the Act? (ii) Whether on the facts, in the circumstances and on the grounds

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

depreciation can be considered as a legitimate deduction in computing the real income of the assessee on general principles or under section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The court rejected the argument on behalf of the revenue that section 32