BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

56 results for “depreciation”+ Section 350clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai400Delhi383Bangalore162Chennai130Ahmedabad63Kolkata56Jaipur40Hyderabad30Rajkot20Visakhapatnam14Indore12Raipur12Pune12Amritsar11Chandigarh10SC9Guwahati8Karnataka6Surat6Lucknow4Cochin3Calcutta2Dehradun2Telangana2Cuttack1Jodhpur1Allahabad1Panaji1Ranchi1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)44Section 26335Section 14A29Disallowance25Section 2(15)23Section 1122Addition to Income22Section 32(1)(iia)20Depreciation18Section 92C

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1001/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

14
Section 115J13
Deduction10

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 871/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 872/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

DCIT, CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1002/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia): “1. Clause (29BA) inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01.04.2009, defines the expression ‘manufacture as under: ‘manufacture’, with its grammatical variations, means a change in a non- living physical object or article or thing, (a) Resulting in transformation of the object

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8(1)KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Eih Ltd V/S. Dcit, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaace 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (Drp For Short) Dated 17.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata U/S 144C(13)/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.11.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13 & Grounds Raised By Assessee Read As Under:- “1.0 Determination Of Arm'S Length Price For Corporate Guarantee Fees 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Tpo") & Accordingly Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao") Erred In Treating The Corporate Guarantee Extended By The Appellant To Its Associated Enterprise (Ae) As International Transaction & Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Panel") Erred In Confirming The Same As An International Transaction Without Appreciating The Fact That It Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of "International Transaction" U/S 92B Of The Act. 1.2 The Ld.Ao/Tpo & The Ld. Panel Failed To Appreciate The Fact That Corporate Guarantee Has Been Advanced By The Appellant As A Matter Of Commercial Prudence To Protect The Business Interest Of The Group By Fulfilling

Section 14Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 92B

350 ITR 527 (SC) which was squarely applicable in the case of the appellant. 4.4 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law and without prejudice to grounds take herein above, the Ld. Panel as well as the Ld. AO while making the disallowance of principal repayment of lease rental erred in not allowing depreciation

EIH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 110/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

depreciation as per the provisions of the IT Act and instead had claimed the entire lease rental as revenue expenditure. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd vs CIT reported in (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein it was held that :- “Held, affirming

DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S EIH LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 153/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

depreciation as per the provisions of the IT Act and instead had claimed the entire lease rental as revenue expenditure. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd vs CIT reported in (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein it was held that :- “Held, affirming

EIH LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. C.I.T KOL - III,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the order passed by the Learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: G. Mallikarjun, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 38Section 38(2)

section 32 of the Act is not satisfied by the assessee ( i.e the test of ownership) and hence the assessee is not entitled for depreciation. The lease arrangement cannot be considered as one of hire purchase as per Circular No. 9/1943 No. 9 [R.Dis.No. 27(4)-IT/43] dated 23.3.1943, since the ITA No. 529/Kol/2013- M/s. EIH Limited

APEEJAY SHIPPING LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - III, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 550/KOL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2003-04

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 33A

section 349 and 350 of the Companies Act, the assessee had in computing its depreciation, claimed depreciation at a lower

D.C..I.T.,CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SISECAM FLAT GLASS INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY HNG FLAT GLASS LTD.), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and cross objection of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2475/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 40

350/­ made by the AO is held to be untenable on facts & in law and is therefore directed to be deleted. These grounds are allowed. “ 6. Monitoring fees paid by the assssee to DEG Bank, Germany qualified as ‘interest’ both under Income-tax Act, 1961 as well as the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India & Germany and the payment made

MARSONS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. CIT-I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1140/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Roy, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263

350/- Rs.7,13,718/- .(-)12292841/- Less :Depreciation as per P/L A/c Rs.8442455/- Add: Depreciation allowed as per act Rs. 5178551/- Loss to be carry forwarded Rs.(-)90,28,937/- Assessed income Rs.1,37,798/- R/O Rs.1,37,800/- ITA No.1140/Kol/2014 – Marsons Limited A.Y.2009-10 3. Before completing the assessment AO issued notices 143(2) as well

EIH LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 181/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 115JB, completely ignoring the principle laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT -vs.- Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. (G.A. No. 1501 of 2014 dated 19-11-2014 which was followed by the Kolkata ITAT in assessee's own case DCIT -vs- EIH Limited [2017] in LT.A. No. 866/Kol/2012 (Assessee's) and 932/Kol/2012 (Dept

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 498/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

Section 115JB, completely ignoring the principle laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT -vs.- Jayshree Tea & Industries Ltd. (G.A. No. 1501 of 2014 dated 19-11-2014 which was followed by the Kolkata ITAT in assessee's own case DCIT -vs- EIH Limited [2017] in LT.A. No. 866/Kol/2012 (Assessee's) and 932/Kol/2012 (Dept

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA vs. NABA DIGANTA WATER MANAGEMENT LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1794/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2013-14 Dcit, Circle-2(2) M/S Naba Diganta Water Aayakar Bhawan, Room Management Ltd., Gn-11- बनाम / No. 24, 7Th Floor, P-7, 19, Salt Lake, Sector-V, Vs. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700 091 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaccn 6958 P] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

350 ITR 527 (SC) and in Mysore Minerals v CIT [1999] 239 ITR 755, wherein the term "Owner" in the context of depreciation belongs to a person, who has invested in the assets; is utilizing the asset; thereby gradually losing the value of investment on account of wear and tear of the asset. Further, reliance written submission also placed

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BURDWAN, BURDWAN vs. SHRI PINTU BHATTACHARJEE, BURDWAN

Appeal is dismissed accordingly

ITA 1/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Acit, Circle-1, V/S. Shri Pintu Bhattacharjee Aayakar Bhavan, Court Memari Old Lic Math, G.T. Compound,Burdwan- Road, Memari, 713101 Burdwan-713146 [Pan No.Adepb 8283 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent S.M.S. Tauheed, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13-06-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Asamsol’S Order Dated 30.10.2014 In Case No.178/C.I.T.(A)/Asl/Acit/Cir-1/Bwn/13-14, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3)/144A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. The Revenue’S Identical Former Grievance Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts On The Deleting Disallowance / Additions Of ₹39,94,137/- Pertaining To Higher Depreciation Rate Claimed On Transmit Complete Mixer & Loaders & Also Granting Relief Of ₹4,73,249/- Regarding Lower Loader Machine; Respectively. We Notice That Cit(A) Discuss In On This Issue Reads As Under:- “6. Ground 2 Is Against Not Granting Depreciation At Higher Rates For Concrete Mixers & Payloaders, Vibrator Soil Compactor Etc. Is Settled In The Cases Reported In Vikram Ispat Vs. State Of Maharastra Air 2003 Bombay 498 P

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

350 ITR 527 (SC) it is held that depreciation in case of lease is available to lessor. In the instant case assessee has claimed depreciation on the basis of ownership. Therefore claiming depreciation and benefit of circular 647 does not go simultaneously. Hence the Hire Purchase agreement is to be examined and decided whether the asset has been obtained under

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRD COMMODITIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2277/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] It(Ss)A Nos.120 To123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) : Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

RISHI GRAPHICS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1666/KOL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. Nos. 1666 To 1668/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. ..............................……………………………………Appellant C/O. Baid & Co., Chartered Accountants, 10C, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aabcr 1977 M] Income Tax Officer...................………………………………………………..............Respondent Ward No. 3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri O.P. Baid, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 11, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 17, 2018 Order These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 2, Kolkata For A.Y. 2002-03 & 2003-04 & Since The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Inter Related, The Same Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By A Single Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First I Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2002-03 Being

350/-. In the said return, the rental income of Rs. 3,90,000/- received by the assessee company was declared under the head “Income from house property”. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was submitted on behalf of the assessee in this regard that the property was taken by it on rent from M/s. Print Sales Company

RISHI GRAPHICS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1668/KOL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. Nos. 1666 To 1668/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. ..............................……………………………………Appellant C/O. Baid & Co., Chartered Accountants, 10C, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aabcr 1977 M] Income Tax Officer...................………………………………………………..............Respondent Ward No. 3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri O.P. Baid, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 11, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 17, 2018 Order These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 2, Kolkata For A.Y. 2002-03 & 2003-04 & Since The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Inter Related, The Same Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By A Single Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First I Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2002-03 Being

350/-. In the said return, the rental income of Rs. 3,90,000/- received by the assessee company was declared under the head “Income from house property”. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was submitted on behalf of the assessee in this regard that the property was taken by it on rent from M/s. Print Sales Company

RISHI GRAPHICS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1667/KOL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. Nos. 1666 To 1668/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. ..............................……………………………………Appellant C/O. Baid & Co., Chartered Accountants, 10C, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aabcr 1977 M] Income Tax Officer...................………………………………………………..............Respondent Ward No. 3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri O.P. Baid, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Amitava Bhattacharya, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 11, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 17, 2018 Order These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 2, Kolkata For A.Y. 2002-03 & 2003-04 & Since The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Inter Related, The Same Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By A Single Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First I Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2002-03 Being

350/-. In the said return, the rental income of Rs. 3,90,000/- received by the assessee company was declared under the head “Income from house property”. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was submitted on behalf of the assessee in this regard that the property was taken by it on rent from M/s. Print Sales Company

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2225/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2225/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.09..2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2018

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 144C(5)Section 92B

depreciation as per the provisions of the IT Act and instead had claimed the entire lease rental as revenue expenditure. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd vs CIT reported in (2013) 350 ITR 527 (SC) wherein it was held that :- “Held, affirming