COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.BHUWALKA STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

80-I. Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings after a certain date, etc.- (1) xxx (2) This section applies to any industrial undertaking which fulfils all the following conditions, namely :— (i) it is not formed by the splitting up, or the reconstruction, of a business already in existence; (ii) it is not formed by the transfer

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S.GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S.GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

80, the assessee claimed depreciation on the value of the building at 2 1/2 per cent. and they also claimed depreciation on furniture at 5 per cent. The question which arose before the court for determination was: whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income

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 80HH & 80 I. If really the assessee was interested to claim depreciation under Section 80HH & 80I it should have

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S RASTHROTHANA PARISHAT

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Sections 70 to 80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that assessee is entitled to claim depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Sections 70 to 80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? 3. This Court in case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona’ [2018] 89 taxmann.com 127 [SC] with regard to allowability and Depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S RASTHROTHANA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Sections 70 to 80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forwards and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? Date of Judgment 14-08-2018 I.T.A.No.168/2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Rasthrothana Parishat 4/22 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Sections 70 to 80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? Date of Judgment 14-08-2018 I.T.A.No.92 /2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & Another Vs. M/s Manipal Academy of Higher Education 4/22 3. Whether on the facts

M/S. HORTICONTRACTS vs. M/S. AGRIHORTICULTURAL CONSULTANTS

Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.P.SANDESH

Sections 70 to 80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? Date of Judgment 14-08-2018 I.T.A.No.92 /2016 Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & Another Vs. M/s Manipal Academy of Higher Education 4/22 3. Whether on the facts

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

80 FEET ROAD KORMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. KAWASAKI MICRO ELECTRONICS INC. 17TH FLOOR, CONCORDE BLOCK UB CITY, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD BANGALORE-560001 PAN: AACCK 7495E. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 29.06.2015 PASSED

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DOMINICIAN SISTERS OF

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

80 FEET ROAD INDIRANAGAR BANGALORE-560 038. …RESPONDENT Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.326/2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Dominician Sisters of Presentation 2/21 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260- A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 08.09.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO. 2163/BANG/2016, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI KARNATAKA FRANSALIAN SOCIETY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

80 of IT Act are not applicable to trusts as they only deal with carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit under section 11(1)(a) of the Act? 3. The learned counsel for Revenue submits that the controversy raised in the present appeal is covered by a decision of this Court