THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MPHASIS LTD

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation and allowances are dealt with in Section 32. Therefore, Parliament has used the expression "any expenditure" in Section 37

SMT. PUNEETHA @ PUNEETHA B. A. vs. SRI. D. RAVI

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: R DEVDAS

depreciation and allowances are dealt with in Section 32. Therefore, Parliament has used the expression "any expenditure" in Section 37

M/S CANARA BANK BSCA SECTION vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(2)

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

37[1] or as a loss incidental to the appellant’s business which is allowable under section 28[i] of the Act. On the other hand, if depreciation

M/S DIFFUSION ENGINEERS LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

depreciation to be allowed on intangible assets reads thus : “15.2 As a consequence of this amendent , the deductions allowable under Section 35A of the Income-tax Act in respect of any expenditure of a capital nature incurred on the acquisition of patent rights or copyrights and under section 35AB in 16 respect of expenditure on know-how have been withdrawn

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX vs. M/S KAWASAKI MICRO ELECTRONICS INC

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

depreciation invoking Section 40(a)(i) of the Act. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the tribunal have deleted the disallowance. It is 4 submitted that consequences of failure to deduct tax at source either on expenditure under Section 32 or Section 37

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD

In the result, the order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

37 of the Act and only when the same was not accepted by the Assessing Officer, the assessee made an alternate 10 claim under Section 35(1)(iv) of the Act before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and alternate claim can be considered by appellate Authority. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'NATIONAL

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

In the result, the order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

37 of the Act and only when the same was not accepted by the Assessing Officer, the assessee made an alternate 10 claim under Section 35(1)(iv) of the Act before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and alternate claim can be considered by appellate Authority. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'NATIONAL

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S V S LAD and SONS

In the result, the second

Bench: N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,ALOK ARADHE

depreciation claimed against the amount paid towards acquisition of leasehold rights over land for a period of 30 years, is a revenue expenditure and is eligible for deduction under Section 37

MANGALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act 80,19,59,658 Disallowance of Depreciation 13,09,37,839 Disallowance

MANGALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act 80,19,59,658 Disallowance of Depreciation 13,09,37,839 Disallowance